 |
| |
| This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you. |
| Moderated by: chrisbet, | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
chrisbet
|
Any recommendations on quality UV filters? Apart from the dubious selection of three or four filters for a fiver on fleabay I have found genuine Nikon at £25 and Hoya at £12 - are the Hoya "Pro" filters good? |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Yea, my recommendation is don't waste your money. Even the very best/most expensive can degrade the image, especially when backlighting is in the frame. Possible exception is photographing heavy seas in gale force winds due to the spray of salty/sandy water, in that case a clear plastic bag over the entire equipment is a good idea. I tried all manner of UV filters, from the best Nikon and Hoya to the cheapest unbranded and all caused ghosting and degradation of image to some extent and the worst wasn't the cheapest. The occasional scratch on the front element causes less degradation, except perhaps directly into the Sun when it might have an effect. |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
Thanks - I'll just keep the lens cap on then ... |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Yes, sounds like a plan, You will need to take it off occasionally to take photo's though!  One of the key things with lenses, especially AF-S lenses is to use them regularly. A friend has just bought an AF-S 200mm f/2.0 lens for a lot of money. It's a very low use lens, immaculate, has been on a shelf for the last five years with very occasional use. My friend bought the lens in good faith, the AF-S motor has seized, the motor needs replacement @ €600. |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
Ouch! |
|||||||||
jk
|
I always put filters on my lenses purely for insurance. I couldnt afford to insure all my kit. Last time I had damage to kit was back in 1980s. Yes I go hill walking and scrambling (foot not car or bike). That said when I got my Z7 and 24-70 Z series lens I didnt buy a filter until later. I did notice there was a distinct difference in sharpness so now there in no filter on that lens. My other lenses without filters are all my long focal length lenses. They provide great sharpness. So whilst I dont disagree with Robert's comment, I think it is a question of insurance. The biggest danger of operation without a filter is the scrape of the metal grips as you put the lens cap back on and take it off! |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
Metal? mine are all plastic... |
|||||||||
jk
|
chrisbet wrote:Metal? mine are all plastic...There is usually a horseshoe metal spring clip in side the lenscap that grips the filter rings. |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
Yours must be old ones .... mine all look like this Attachment: 20190316_232035.jpg (Downloaded 83 times) |
|||||||||
jk
|
I will need to check again. |
|||||||||
jk
|
Yes you are correct. My older units are metal but the new Z series caps are plastic. I dont know if that is scratchier than metal of not. I guess the new stuff is ABS. Robert what are your thoughts? ABS is pretty hard or even steel like but will it scratch the surface coating. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:Yea, my recommendation is don't waste your money. Even the very best/most expensive can degrade the image, especially when backlighting is in the frame....but more degradation to its resale value.  I personally prefer a polariser. It gives far greater improvement in images than UV. I always leave the camera lens hood in place (even in the bag) ....it adds a bit of distance protection. |
|||||||||
novicius
|
Once every so often I come across this topic...apart from Protecting the Front Element , a well thought-out UV Filter will Improve / Enhance the Photo , do n`t take my word for it...here is a Site from a Lab in Poland ( English is Good ) that Thoroughly Investigates / Tests Many UV and Polarizing Filters and Lenses , Camera`s etc.,...Explaining How and with What Equipment it was done...Here`s a Link to their frontpage : https://www.optyczne.pl/inne_testy.html I myself have had a UV filter of Good Make on my Very first Lens which I still have ,and on ALL my Other Lenses from Personal Experience I can Assure you that Hoya Multi Coated Filters rank among the Best and for a reasonable fee...also have Nikon which is just as Good but are costly..B&W is Mechanically Better and Very Costly as Rings are made of Brass therefore Never get Stuck ( which has happened a couple of times with the HMC filters which are made of Aluminium ) , other than that HMC is my Preference....for Certain events ( graduated ND filter f.ex. ) I use a China made knock-off Cokin system , which I started with the Original Cokin made in France ( Chromo Filter S A ), the knock-off is just as Good ( Actually Cokin is now made in China and Rumour has it that Both Original and Knock-off are made by same Mnfg`r ) , and are made of " Optical Resin ", reminiscent of Kodak Wratten Filters , yet Optical Resin is more Durable, and Optical Quality is Superb !! Rest to say : I am Awaiting the Arrival of Two 77mm UV HMC filters for my PC-E Nikkor 24 f3.5 and PC-E Nikkor 85 f2.8 , these Lenses are the Epitaph of Optical Quality and yet, I am Confident the HMC`s will Improve on matters ,so No Hollow words here , but based on a Solid Foundation of Experience gathered over the course of FIFTY Years of Practical Use. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
If I ever get the Hoya 77mm UV filter off the front of my 80-200 f/2.8, I will gladly send it to you. When I got my Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 it was fitted with a 127mm? Hoya UV filter which had to be destroyed to open up the lens. I was sad about that, they are VERY expensive. I suspect the one on my 80-200 will have to be destroyed to get it off, maybe there is some trick to get it off but the Nikon service guy's tried and gave up. I have numerous images I took in tests which disagree totally with arguments for them. They are to be found in an early post on this forum, the loss of contrast is dramatic, removal of the filters completely restored the expected contrast. I will try to find them on my system. It's most pronounced when there is back or side lighting. As for UV contamination, very few lenses pass UV in any great amount and the IR/UV filter permanently fitted to the sensor limits the admission of Infra Red and Ultra Violet light which can reach the sensor. If you feel the UV filters improve your photography that's fine, we all have different perspectives. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
It was July, 2009. That was before this forum had it's last change of software, so unfortunately the thread is gone forever. However, I have found the images and even better, they are notated with the makes and details of the filters I tried in the experiment I carried out. I was using a D1x with my Nikkor 50mm f1.4 lens at the time. It all started because I wanted to take a side-lit photo of my son, Christopher. I was experimenting with the lighting and positioning the camera and subject to get the best effect. I didn't realise at first but the contrast was being seriously reduced. Then the penny dropped, the lighting was causing the problem but why? I tried several 52mm UV filters and the effect varied somewhat so I went the whole hog and removed the UV filter entirely. Viola! Contrast restored, then I realised there was ghosting which at first I hadn't understood. This was the first image, the UV filer was not marked with a manufacturers name. Christopher wasn't a good sitter! #1  This was the second image, the UV filer was not marked with a manufacturers name. #2  This is the third image, this filter was marked 'Helios UV'. #3  This is the fourth image, this filter was marked 'Nikkor L39'. #4  This is the fifth image, the filter was marked 'Hoya Skylight' #5  Finally, the sixth image, with NO FILTER. #6  This is the picture I wanted, taken some time after the above series of test exposures, once I had satisfied myself that the UV filter was to blame.  I took many other exposures at the time hence the various degrees of boredom on Christopher's face as I tried the different filters and various positions to try to minimise the glare and ghosting. Those tests convinced me that the perceived benefits of using UV filters were far outweighed by the real and serious image degradation I experienced. I also recognise similar effects in images which I couldn't understand why they were lack-lustre, I now put that down to using a UV filter. The 'better' filters didn't perform better than the unbranded filters, in fact image #1 with an unbranded filter could be considered among the least affected. I would be very interested is someone else fancied doing a similar test series... Since then I dumped all my UV filters except the one which seems to be glued to my Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 trombone lens. I would dearly like to remove that but fear the forces needed to remove it would do damage to the lens, so I have to weigh that against the effects it has on my images. |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
Interesting - I presume the ghosting is caused by light being reflected from the surface of the front element and bouncing off the interior surface of the filter - in which case the quality of the filter itself is of little influence. As for the stuck filter, have you tried gently warming the lens and using a rubber band on the filter rim to increase grip? |
|||||||||
Robert
|
chrisbet wrote:Interesting - I presume the ghosting is caused by light being reflected from the surface of the front element and bouncing off the interior surface of the filter - in which case the quality of the filter itself is of little influence. That's my take, in fact I think the 'better' coatings may reflect more and therefore be worse. I do accept there may be situations where a filter might be of some use but without experimenting I believe it's impossible to recognise those situations, certainly for me anyway, so I take aboard the simplistic saying that putting cheap glass in front of expensive glass is not a good idea. Like I say, there is already a very high quality UV/IR filter in front of the sensor which regulates the UV transmission to exacting standards so from a UV standpoint it's duplicating the function. As for the stuck filter, have you tried gently warming the lens and using a rubber band on the filter rim to increase grip? I have tried many approaches, my buddy Nes, who deals in Nikon lenses and cameras gave up short of breaking something, he used a filter wrench. I took it to the NPS roadshow at Manchester and asked the technician to try to get it of without destroying anything and he and his buddies gave up. I will live with it. It's a superb lens even with the filter so I don't want to compromise it simply to remove a filter. |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
Following up your post I looked into my 55-200 lens to see if I could determine any internal reflections from the cokin filter fitted by its previous owner. I couldn't so thought I would remove the filter - it was stuck solid! So I tried the rubber band trick - not moving. I tried a rubber bottle lid gripper thing we have for getting tops off jars and that didn't work despite having the mechanical advantage of a "handle". Thinking about the very fine threads involved I wondered if they were damaged in some way and tried gently tapping round the filter with a light screwdriver shaft held at a 45 degree angle to keep it well clear of the glass - just tapping the serrated edge of the filter ring - after a couple of rounds of tapping the filter just unscrewed easily - maybe the vibration loosened its grip? |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Most likely, tapping the vicinity of the threads would possibly release my 77mm filter off my 80-200, I might give it a try over the w/e, am busy painting the kitchen doors right now. |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
Robert wrote:Most likely, tapping the vicinity of the threads would possibly release my 77mm filter off my 80-200, I might give it a try over the w/e, am busy painting the kitchen doors right now.No your not - you are sitting at the mac .... |
|||||||||
Robert
|
The paint has to dry, I hate watching paint dry, I just applied another coat, so yes I'm on-line again for a few minutes, then off to my lathe, turning a heavy duty adjustable 'wedge' mount for the astro equatorial camera mount. A friend just called by, he wants to dig a 35 cubic meter hole in my garden, I only mentioned it in passing... |
|||||||||
novicius
|
This reminds me of a Gent who told me that Filters seriously Degraded the quality of his Takumar`s , do n`t know if they were Super or SMC Tak`s,.. Another photog was frantically in search of FUJI filters for FUJI Lenses for those \" played nicely together \" ,..a Minolta shooter used Minolta filters and said there were No problems , looking at your pics., showed me that it is part of a shooting style as well, I always have the sunshade mounted and a hand ready for extra shielding , I must admit having had the same result as you , but with a rangefinder ( Bessa L with heliar 15 f4.5 ) without filter tho`..a Reflex finder could have \" warned \" me in time. For me , I detect an Improvement in Micro-contrast , on a Variety of Lenses....Nikkors..Mamya ( M645 )..Horseman ( FUJI / Schneider )..Rollei ( Tessar / Xenar )..etc. I would say that Light striking Glass sideways Usually poses a Challenge,..my SEKOR 300 f5.6 ( M645 ) lived through an ordeal as it was protected by a UV filter which took the blow and cracked , leaving Front Lens Unscathed. So I think that Style and Conditions may play a Significant part in Adopting Filters , Abrasive Dust would be Detrimental to Front Lens coatings , so at the end of the day it could be a case scenario of choosing between the lesser of two evils. Has anyone looked at the Site I linked to ?...I find their Testing Procedure rather Interesting and Solid. ...and...How can I Switch Off that picture of Interrupting all the time..it is downright Annoying.. |
|||||||||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |