Questions about the Filters

[Rajarshi]

Hi Guys,

Have just bought a Nikon D5000 with 18-55 and 18-200 lenses.
Planning to go for some filters to protect those lenses.
Let me know which one will be appropriate for me.

• Polarizer
• UV Filter

Any suggestions,please.

Regards,
Raj.

[Terry Tedor]

Hi Guys,

Have just bought a Nikon D5000 with 18-55 and 18-200 lenses.
Planning to go for some filters to protect those lenses.
Let me know which one will be appropriate for me.

• Polarizer
• UV Filter

Any suggestions,please.

Regards,
Raj.

Raj, yes, definitely a UV filter and probably a polarizer, depending on your needs. Checkout the discussion in this thread if you're interested.

[Colin Southern]

Hi Raj,

Definately a UV for protection. The polariser also provides protection, but you wouldn't notmally have one on all the time because it'll cost you 2 stops of light.

[rpcrowe]

Yes on both. However there is a vast quality and price difference between top-line and run of the mill filters. Trying to save some money by purchasing lower grade filters is counter-productive - especially if you are using high grade lenses. It would be a shame to spend the cash to get a really good lens and then degrade its performance with an inadequate filter.

Two filters types that I use and am happy with are the B&W and the high grade Hoya Multicoated models. However, unless you have researched filters, be prepared for price shock - they are expensive; especially in the larger sizes.

There are distributors from Hong Kong that sell filters at a greatly discounted price. However, be careful from whom you purchase these filters, there have been rumors circulating about counterfeit filters being sold. I don't know if these rumors are true or not but, often "Where there's smoke, there's fire!"

[Colin Southern]

Two filters types that I use and am happy with are the B&W and the high grade Hoya Multicoated models.

You can safely add Heliopan to that list if it helps. SH-PMC are their multi-coated varients.

[Rajarshi]

Hi Terry/Colin/Rpcrowe,
Thank you for your reply.
Will go for UV first then Polarizer.
Rpcrowe, will not buy those stuffs from HK, coz I am in US.
If you have any idea of real vendors, sharing is appreciated.

BR//Raj

[Colin Southern]

If you have any idea of real vendors, sharing is appreciated.

I think that 99.99% of the planet will agree that www.bhphotovideo.com is the place to beat.

[Rajarshi]

Thank you Colin!

[Terry Tedor]

I'll second that.

[rpcrowe]

I think that 99.99% of the planet will agree that www.bhphotovideo.com is the place to beat.

I think that B&H is great and I also frequently purchase from Adorama in New York City ( http://www.adorama.com/ ). Adorama has some items which B&H doesn;t carry, among these are the quite good Adorama housebrand products with the Flashpoint name.

[Donald]

But there are those rebels amongst us who constitute the 0.01%.

[Colin Southern]

But there are those rebels amongst us who constitute the 0.01%.

God bless them all

[Geoff F]

It is strange how opinions differ in different places. this question was asked on the photographic section of a UK wildlife site that I frequently use. Every reply, except me, stated quite definitely that using any form of filter, including UV would produce soft images.

Personally, I would suggest that wildlife photography is where a protective filter is essential; particularly the way that I treat my equipment when on a 'bug hunt' in wet or bramble infested woods, etc. Salt spray is another risk for me. To say nothing about a tripod which often falls or gets knocked over. My filters certainly do get scratched eventually.

But I suppose I have seen those ultra cautious photographers who wrap everything in bubble wrap and carefully clean their lenses with blower brushes before taking their one weekly photo.

But I have stopped carrying a polarising filter now. It was so rarely used; and by the time I found and fitted it the moment had usually gone.

[Donald]

Every reply, except me, stated quite definitely that using any form of filter, including UV would produce soft images.

I wonder if anyone had ever put them in front of two images - one with, one without. And could they tell the difference? If they could, then they really need to broaden their interests in life!!

[Colin Southern]

It is strange how opinions differ in different places. this question was asked on the photographic section of a UK wildlife site that I frequently use. Every reply, except me, stated quite definitely that using any form of filter, including UV would produce soft images.

Unfortunately this is a common "mantra" repeated by many. Personally, I think that they get caught up in the "good-sounding theory", whilst disregarding the practical reality. In THEORY all of the oceans of the world rise a little if you throw so much as a single pebble into one of them ... but of course the practical reality is something quite different. I'd challenge any of them to consistantly correctly identify a group of identical shots taken with and without a UV filter.

In fact personally, I'd be interested to know if the additional UV filter might even IMPROVE image sharpness by a miniscule degree as I'm sure that even digital cameras must have some kind of miniscule reaction to it.

[rpcrowe]

I have never seen any objective tests such as MTF testing done with lenses which tell with any certainty the measurable amount of image degradation caused by specific brands of filters. I know from personal experience and from narrative accounts from other photographers that some cheaper filters do a noticeable job of causing image problems. However, I have never seen any objective testing which could identify the amount of image quality loss (sharpness, contrast, etc.) between mid-range filters and the top-line models. Additionally, I have not seen any objective comparisons between the various top-line filters.

If such tests have been done and have been published - I would love to see them.

[Colin Southern]

If such tests have been done and have been published - I would love to see them.

Yeah - but then all that would be left to argue over would be "PC -v- Mac" and "Nikon -v- Canon"