Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lens Filters

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Lens Filters

    I am curious if anyone uses filters on their camera lenses? Since switching to digital I find that I don't use filters nearly as much as I did long ago when I used a film camera. If you use filters I'd like to see some examples of what the filter does.

    I keep protective UV filters on both my lenses. They are clear and used to help protect the expensive lens.

    I also have a circular polarizer. Below are two photos taken a few seconds apart. The filter was on the lens for both photos the only thing that changed was rotating the filter 90 degrees.

    In this photo the filter is rotated so it is doing almost nothing. The image is slightly darker than without the filter but basically it looks the same as no filter.


    For this shot I rotated the filter 90 degrees and you can see the clouds magically appear and sky goes from hazy white to a nice blue.

    #2
    The use of coloured filters is almost non-existing after digital photography came to us. This is because you can simulate filter effects digitally in Photoshop and other programs.

    The only filters I use, is UV filters for protective reasons. Polarizing filter can also be used, but I never do. However, many photographers use graded greyfilters when the contrasts are big, i.e. light skies, sunsets and so on.
    ---
    Regards; Sigve.
    Regards; Sigve.
    ---
    IF I WIN IN LOTTO, I COULD GO EVERYWHERE. WITH FRAM....

    Comment


      #3
      I also use some filters, on all 3 of my lenses i use uv protection filters.
      and then I use some cokin filters for the nice looks in my pictures.

      here a explanation i posted earlier:

      Originally posted by wesley View Post
      yes the first 3 and number 5 were taken with cokin filters, number 4 was without filter but isn't bad actually.
      here are the filters,they are in the same order as the pictures.



      1:is a filter to make a warm environment in your picture so its making your picture darker.

      2 and 3 are filters to make lights (for instance a car) a little bit more special to make stars of it or how they called a galaxy circle.

      4:is a diffusor filter so it will look like you need glasses.

      Comment


        #4
        I only use UV filters for the most part on all my lenses. Since I shoot exclusively in RAW format now, I don't really see the need for any circular polarizing filters.

        Last night, returning from a brisk evening walk, I accidentally dropped my lens on the doorsteps as I was trying to reach for my house keys....

        lens + drop + concrete stairs = no good!

        Luckily, as of this moment, all that seems to have been broken was the 77mm filter.... the lens itself, it's glass, elements and focusing rings all survived the fall, but the filter took the whole impact...

        This image below serves as a warning to anyone not using a filter!

        Rather destroy the filter than the lens or any of it's precision glasses.

        With best regards from Jan-Olav Storli

        Administrator and Owner of CaptainsVoyage.
        Main page: http://www.captainsvoyage.com
        Old forum: http://captainsvoyage.7.forumer.com/
        Join us: Save the "Kong Olav" on facebook

        Surround yourself with positive, ethical people who are committed to excellence.

        Comment


          #5
          How are you post processing to get the same polarizing affect? I've found the filter very useful to cut glare off a shiny car, glass or photographing water. I've just not found a good way to do it after the fact. It would be great to do without it since the polarizer eats up one or two stops worth of light.

          Sorry to hear about the broken filter. At least it's not the lens but it is still one more thing in life that demands your money. (PS: Keep your camera and car separate. You do not want the two working together to form a really expensive plan.)

          Comment


            #6
            I’ve always tended to be of the opinion that putting a cheaper, less optically good filter in front of a good lens doesn’t seem too great an idea (though I suppose one should do tests with and without filter to prove the point, displaying the results in the way one normally does). I think this attitude comes from knowing someone years ago who had an incredibly expensive camera with which he took slides that he only ever viewed with a really cheap optically grotty projector.

            As for protection – well there again you don’t actually know what would have happened to the lens if you hadn’t had the filter on when you dropped the camera. The front lens elements are mounted differently than a filter on a filter ring. And I would think it possible that a broken filter could have damaged the lens in some circumstances.

            I’m also not convinced that one needs the UV filtering except in extreme e.g. very high altitude mountain situations. Maybe if I visit a windy desert I might get a filter to avoid sand-blasting my lens.

            As I was about to admit in a post in 365, I am also a bit casual about lens caps.

            I’d agree about not needing the polarising filter if you can get the same result in post processing, but Dane’s example seems a bit different than the usual use of darkening the blue of a sky with white clouds. What did the sky look like to the eye, Dane, was it like the first picture?

            Comment


              #7
              I agree; you can't make a polarizing effect in Photoshop; you have to have a polarizing filter on your lens (unless you are a photoshop wizard (I'm not)).
              And yes, I agree that it's better to break a cheap UV filter (actually, they are not so cheap...) instead of breaking your lens glass, and it's also easier to clean the filter instead of the lens glass.
              ---
              Regards; Sigve.
              Regards; Sigve.
              ---
              IF I WIN IN LOTTO, I COULD GO EVERYWHERE. WITH FRAM....

              Comment


                #8
                Ah, hadn’t read pilotdane’s post #5 when I wrote post #6 - yes indeed as both Dane and Sigve say, cutting off glare from shiny objects or water, and also in connection with unwanted reflections in windows, are situations where a polarising filter is required.
                I assume pakarang was just thinking about darkening blue sky and contrast with white clouds when he mentioned post processing.

                Dane’s sky example does seem rather a subtly different situation though, and actually makes me think I might borrow David’s polarising filter and experiment in a similar weather situation. Do tell me what the sky and clouds looked like to the naked eye, Dane.

                Comment


                  #9
                  The sky and clouds looked very similar to the first picture except the bottom cloud had some color that the first photo did not reproduce. What is really interesting is how the bottom cloud changed. In the first picture it appears darker than the background but in the second picture it appears lighter and had a more true color.

                  I have not used the polarizing filter since my Panama Canal cruise. I'm getting ready for a trip and found it lying in the bottom of my bag so I took it out for those two test shots. Now, I think I might have to use it more often.

                  I must admit that I am bad about cleaning my lenses so I put UV filters on first thing. I don't mind wiping salt spray, dust or dirt off a filter but I'm always nervous about touching the $1'000 glass.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Absolutely fascinating Dane, so glad the weather presented you with that example for your test shots rather than something like this kind of sky.
                    You just may have got me trying out polarising filters in new sky situations!

                    Comment


                      #11
                      When I first saw that beautiful picture I wondered if you used a polarizer or a bit of Photoshop to make the sky so dramatic.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by pilotdane View Post
                        When I first saw that beautiful picture I wondered if you used a polarizer or a bit of Photoshop to make the sky so dramatic.
                        All I did was adjust the horizontal of the framing a little and crop out unwanted foreground traffic. The combination of white building and the sky came out to my satisfaction with the camera on an automatic setting. To my taste it was sufficiently dramatic without further adjustment although I expect some people might have wanted to darken the blue sky further. That would conventionally have been done with a polarising filter in film camera days, but now easy in photoshop, which was exactly the sort of classic situation I guess pakarang was originally referring to.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I need a new 77mm filter, a neutral UV filter, not a polarizing filter.

                          Tiffen, Hoya, Tokina or Kaesman?

                          Cheap 600 NOK one or is there any advantages to spending a little more, such as up to 900 NOK, and in the real high end, the 1.100 NOK?

                          Thoughts please?
                          With best regards from Jan-Olav Storli

                          Administrator and Owner of CaptainsVoyage.
                          Main page: http://www.captainsvoyage.com
                          Old forum: http://captainsvoyage.7.forumer.com/
                          Join us: Save the "Kong Olav" on facebook

                          Surround yourself with positive, ethical people who are committed to excellence.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            I own Tiffen, Hoya and B&W at varying price points and could not tell you which was mounted on what lens. I don't think it matters at my level of photography.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by pilotdane View Post
                              I own Tiffen, Hoya and B&W at varying price points and could not tell you which was mounted on what lens. I don't think it matters at my level of photography.
                              That's what I think as well...

                              Coated, multi-coated..... I don't think it really matters. I just found it strange that some filters (just a piece of tiny round glass) retails at such inflated prices. Some even at the triple price of the cheapest version.

                              20 years ago, these filters were reasonably priced, but now, the glass price reaches almost the value of gold.
                              With best regards from Jan-Olav Storli

                              Administrator and Owner of CaptainsVoyage.
                              Main page: http://www.captainsvoyage.com
                              Old forum: http://captainsvoyage.7.forumer.com/
                              Join us: Save the "Kong Olav" on facebook

                              Surround yourself with positive, ethical people who are committed to excellence.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X