 Hanne Jessen |
Filters Hi! My son just went to South Africa and, like me, he enjoys photographing. I have recommended him to buy a Canon EOS 400D and also want to recommend him to get a filter to protect the lens against dust and and against the sharp rays of the sun. Do you agree that this is a good idea - and if so, what filter do you think he should use?
|
|
|
|
||
|
A C |
good idea? It depends on what kind of photography he wants to do. If he doesn't plan on spending money on any lenses, he shouldn't purchase the dslr. A better option in that case, in my opinion, would be the Canon's latest powershot. It is a fantastic camera and a lot less expensive. If he does plan on purchasing other lenses and going that route, the 400D is a great starter camera. I suggest a UV filter and a Circular Polarizer.
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
Hi Hanne, from a photography point of view your son will enjoy South Africa! Very photogenic country. Used to live there. I agree with Cherylann: UV and CP filters are enough (get good quality). Most other effects are much better, more precise, and much more conveniently applied in post processing.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
UV for protection against dust, CP to help keep cloud definition and blue skies. To protect "against the sharp rays of the sun" I think you mean glare/flare. For this, use lens hood.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Greetings Hanne. There's been a fair amount of debate on this issue here and elsewhere. You'll find pros are generally opposed to adding extra glass to the front of a lens unless they feel it serves some useful purpose beyond protecting a lens, which filters don't really do and I'll briefly explain. First, both lenses and filters require cleaning when they get dirty. Newer lenses aren't going to wear out fom that process and they have gaskets to prevent dust from entering the lens barrel. Periodically, like a camera body, a lens should be sent in for CLA or cleaning lube and adjustment which is going to clean anything that may have entered the barrel in say an older lens without the same type of gasketing. Also newer lenses, those made since the 80's, have multiple coatings to prevent or reduce things like glare and flare under many conditions but for that, I always shoot with a lens hood, even indoors. THAT will help protect against physical damage. If a lens gets whacked to the point where it breaks the filter, chances are the hit is going to be severe enough to damage the external element any way. Hence there's no point in adding say a UV filter unless you're trying to get rid of UV at very high altitudes. The same is true of polarizers which have limited utility as well and rarely used indoors. My suggestion at this point is to get your son a book or two on filters rather than filters themselves. Let him pick and chose what he needs based on the type of shooting he does and see what's available. My own preference is a multiple filter set-up using a universal hood/shade from, HiTech that let's me use the same filters on all my lenses no matter what their size. There are others like Sailwind, Calumet, Tiffen, and Cokin with a "P" ring, They're made from resin and IMHO to some degree will protect a lens better than glass because they're flexible. Two books that come to mind on filters are the old Kodak book called "Using Filters" and "Photographers Guide to Using Filters" published by Amphoto and written by Meehan. Remember too that there are all kinds of filters for various purposes: color balance, contrast enhancers, special effects, split image, soft focus, etc. And then there's also (I hate to say it) photo shop. YIKES !!!! I gotta go.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Hanne Jessen |
Dear all, thanks a lot for your advice, it is all very useful. I have sent a summary to my son - for myself, first thing is to get a hood, I guess... and then look more into the filter/what filter/no filter problem. Thanks again, greetings Hanne
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
"Hence there's no point in adding say a UV filter unless you're trying to get rid of UV at very high altitudes." The Johannesburg/Pretoria metro area (a.k.a. Gauteng) is on a large plateau at 1700 meters (5200 feet) above sealevel. Plenty UV there! The Kruger Park and east coast game reserves aren't as high, but are bombarded by UV as well. In most of South Africa, a UV filter is pretty much a basic requirement.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Hello Hanne, Well; I guess it's my turn to weigh in. Mark is quite correct concerning the debate over "to use a UV or not to use; THAT is the question." LOL The typical UV filters that most will buy really don't filter UV at all; at least not to any appreciable amount. I think Mark and I went to the same school of photography; experience. There is no debate whatsoever in my mind. To add a piece of glass in front of expensive glass is just plain ridiculous. This physical principle is called (air-glass-air-glass) The light must now pass thru TWO layers of air and TWO mediums of glass, not to mention (entry & exit) of the filter medium itself! Ok..so now you need to put on a CP filter...on top of the UV filter? wow! I think not. I'm sure one could find a optically perfect UV filter, although I doubt any of us could afford it; save NASA. Leave the UV off..Buy a high quality CP.
Pete
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Yep, you're exactly right Pete. Three schools: My alma mater, Northwestern followed by graduate work at the School of Experience then post doc work at The School of Hard Knocks where I'm currently enrolled in seminars. Seasoned Greetings amigo. Hope you're all well and happy. Mark
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
I prefer another, a 4th school: empirical testing. Take the same photo twice (from tripod), with and without a good quality UV filter. Put them up on your screen, side by side. Compare. SEE the difference. THEN you decide.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Yep, "W"..That will do it for most and IS the best way to determine that UV filters are a waste of money in most (real world) testing. There is ONE filter that does show promise in actually filtering out UV...The (Tiffen Haze-1); still, I would not want the glass in front of my lens; especially at $10.00 Pete
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
Well the proof of the pudding is in the eating, of course. And my practical experience is very different: I see considerable difference with my Hoya UV filter on in high-UV environments like beaches, 9,000 feet mountains, and African game reserves and deserts. Less blue cast, more neutrally balanced and saturated colors. Easier edits.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||