Hoya filter grade differences, any feedback?

[iriairi]

Getting ready to break down and buy Canon 24-105 and need to get filters for it. I like Hoya, but have never bought their Pro1D series, just there S-HMC. Has anybody done a comparision? I couldn't find one searching the forum (it was a quick search...) And if they haven't done a comparison, does anybody have an opinion about the pro1d line

 

[Socrates]

Getting ready to break down and buy Canon 24-105 and need to get filters for it. I like Hoya, but have never bought their Pro1D series, just there S-HMC. Has anybody done a comparision? I couldn't find one searching the forum (it was a quick search...) And if they haven't done a comparison, does anybody have an opinion about the pro1d line

I use Pro-1 exclusively now although some of my older filters are S-HMC. I never did an objective comparison. However, I feel that ANYTHING in front of the lens will degrade performance and I want that degradation to be as minimal as is possible.

 

[MX962]

Your buying L glass why would you put a filter over it

 

[Socrates]

Your buying L glass why would you put a filter over it

For starters, I can think of a polarizer.

Of course, I shoot Nikon so I don't know what you mean by "L-glass."

 

[iriairi]

Your buying L glass why would you put a filter over it

MX962, I shoot a decent amount of waterfall footage, and really prefer a polarizer for it. And I am a noob, so go figure... I put plastic on my furniture too

 

[sabbath999]

Your buying L glass why would you put a filter over it

The VERY first time I took my $1700 70-200 VR out, I went to the zoo. I had a 77mm UV filter on the lens, and a lens hood as well. I walked up the hill to take a picture of some zebras... one zebra ran over and bit another one on the ass, and the one that was bitten jumped and kicked.

He was facing right towards me when he did it, standing in a puddle of water and God only knows what else...

THWAP! The camera knocked back against my head, knocked my glasses off and knocked me back a step.

Half sick, I turned the front of the camera around and BANG, right in the middle of my lens was a three inch pile of BLUCH made up of rocks and mud. I hadn't even taken 10 pictures with it.

I hurried down to the restroom and carefully unscrewed the filter, hoping... PRAYING... that it had taken the worst of it.

It had. The lens its self was untouched, but the UV filter had a big chip, right dead smack in the middle of it.

I don't know about you, but I would much rather lose a $50 UV filter than a $1700 lens.

 

[sabbath999]

I went back to see if I had a picture of the filter... I don't, but I do have a picture from just before this happened. The one zebra standing there reached over and bit the one that was sitting down... that mud/rock crap was what came flying my way.

 

[kundalini]

You may want to consider B+W filters as well.

 

[Mystwalker]

Your buying L glass why would you put a filter over it

Assuming filters slightly affect IQ, my photo only for family - I'm not convinced it does, but that's for another thread.

My daughter likes to run up and poke front of lens with sticky/gooey fingers.

 

[MX962]

The VERY first time I took my $1700 70-200 VR out, I went to the zoo. I had a 77mm UV filter on the lens, and a lens hood as well. I walked up the hill to take a picture of some zebras... one zebra ran over and bit another one on the ass, and the one that was bitten jumped and kicked.

He was facing right towards me when he did it, standing in a puddle of water and God only knows what else...

THWAP! The camera knocked back against my head, knocked my glasses off and knocked me back a step.

Half sick, I turned the front of the camera around and BANG, right in the middle of my lens was a three inch pile of BLUCH made up of rocks and mud. I hadn't even taken 10 pictures with it.

I hurried down to the restroom and carefully unscrewed the filter, hoping... PRAYING... that it had taken the worst of it.

It had. The lens its self was untouched, but the UV filter had a big chip, right dead smack in the middle of it.

I don't know about you, but I would much rather lose a $50 UV filter than a $1700 lens.

Oh man that sucks hope you insure your equipment ! as you should... I get alot of rock and sand blast shooting motocross but never had an issue yet . Na only filters i put on are polerizers and ND's clear glass and such I never use any more not saying they wont help just in case ! I opt for no more problems with using them.If in fact I do get a busted up peice of equipment 50 bucks and its replaced . peice of mind...

 

[MX962]

Assuming filters slightly affect IQ, my photo only for family - I'm not convinced it does, but that's for another thread.

My daughter likes to run up and poke front of lens with sticky/gooey fingers.

Eh dont flame on me I'm just telling my story of filters and the crap they can cause you...Good friend of mine had an issue with his MK3s real bad problem with back focusing then front focusing sent it to Canon 3 times they said it wasnt the camera ! Ok so he sent the lens checked out great ,same problems keep happening with his 70-200L 2.8 this whent on for about 3 months ,getting randon shots in focus , another friend suggested taking of the glass filter and give it a try at the track ! ha i cant tell you how far he threw it ,but lifes been good ever since ,best regards ED

 

[Garbz]

MX962 lenses are expensive. While a bit of dirt may not be a problem why not look for some of the horror stories on this forum. One member I've read had a coke or coffee or something spilt on the front of the lens, I have smacked my camera lens first into a cliff hard enough to have a filter crack. No anti scratch coating would survive that I don't care what you say.

If you have something worth protecting protect it. If it's degrading performance because of shooting into the light then remove it.

I don't shoot into the light often and in http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/s...d.php?t=100830 this thread I have proved that a Hoya S-HMC does not produce any at all visible problems even with Nikon's Pro lenses under ideal conditions. So why would you NOT put a filter in-front of an L series lens.

As for what filter. I have a filter from each of the Hoya series. The standard UV and the HMC UV still produce notable degradation. The S-HMC is quite a wonderful filter and when looking into the front of the lens you can't notice the filter is there with a lens hood on.

As for the Pro1D that's just marketing smoke being blown up the collective asses of photographers. The width of an optical quality piece of glass has no impact into the quality of the light that is passing through at these small tollerances. All the problems filters cause happen mainly on the surface (reflections from lackof or poor coatings, refractions from uneven polishing). The prospect of designing a filter "specifically for digital cameras" is absurd snake oil.

 

[MX962]

MX962 lenses are expensive. While a bit of dirt may not be a problem why not look for some of the horror stories on this forum. One member I've read had a coke or coffee or something spilt on the front of the lens, I have smacked my camera lens first into a cliff hard enough to have a filter crack. No anti scratch coating would survive that I don't care what you say.

If you have something worth protecting protect it. If it's degrading performance because of shooting into the light then remove it.

I don't shoot into the light often and in http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/s...d.php?t=100830 this thread I have proved that a Hoya S-HMC does not produce any at all visible problems even with Nikon's Pro lenses under ideal conditions. So why would you NOT put a filter in-front of an L series lens.

As for what filter. I have a filter from each of the Hoya series. The standard UV and the HMC UV still produce notable degradation. The S-HMC is quite a wonderful filter and when looking into the front of the lens you can't notice the filter is there with a lens hood on.

As for the Pro1D that's just marketing smoke being blown up the collective asses of photographers. The width of an optical quality piece of glass has no impact into the quality of the light that is passing through at these small tollerances. All the problems filters cause happen mainly on the surface (reflections from lackof or poor coatings, refractions from uneven polishing). The prospect of designing a filter "specifically for digital cameras" is absurd snake oil.

I will quote you lenses are expensive therefore each item is insured for replacement or repair ,cost is for me any way $6 a month for insuring around $13,000 in total equipment .You can put a filter on your lens and by all means do if you feel better about it,as for moving into a better position as for the sun not affecting auto focus and what not or remove it when i need to,i realy dont have time to mess with it out there

 

[Mystwalker]

Eh dont flame on me I'm just telling my story of filters and the crap they can cause you...Good friend of mine had an issue with his MK3s real bad problem with back focusing then front focusing sent it to Canon 3 times they said it wasnt the camera ! Ok so he sent the lens checked out great ,same problems keep happening with his 70-200L 2.8 this whent on for about 3 months ,getting randon shots in focus , another friend suggested taking of the glass filter and give it a try at the track ! ha i cant tell you how far he threw it ,but lifes been good ever since ,best regards ED

If you are a pro, you want the best IQ possible.

I want the best IQ possible, but at same time I have to balance my daughter poking her fingers at lens - all the time. For me, possible distortion, which I have yet to witness, is worth the extra protection from daughter's fingers.

Even if there were not two views to this filter discussion, I think I would still have filter on lens. If I were paying rent with photo, I may change mind.

 

[MX962]

If you are a pro, you want the best IQ possible.

I want the best IQ possible, but at same time I have to balance my daughter poking her fingers at lens - all the time. For me, possible distortion, which I have yet to witness, is worth the extra protection from daughter's fingers.

Even if there were not two views to this filter discussion, I think I would still have filter on lens. If I were paying rent with photo, I may change mind.

I hear you I dont pay rent with my photos I pay for my daughters racing habit with it,there is a camera for her to use and one she canot she knows this !!! pretty much for the reason you are mentioning