Digital camera filters vs film camera filters

[triggerhappy]

hi.

Is there a significant difference between film filters and digital filters?

Mark

[carregwen]

hi.

Is there a significant difference between film filters and digital filters?

Mark

Not sure I understand the question. What type of filters are you referring to?

[arith]

Yes, there is; Sigma cpl filters are marked DG, because an anti reflective coating is applied. I suspect it is the same for all filters because the glass in front of the sensor reflects more light than film.

Doesn't mean you can't use film filters on a digital, just that there might be a bit of ghosting.

[Dave Humphries]

Additionally, if we are talking polarising filters, film ones were "linear" and Digital cameras really needs the "circular" variety - something to do with digital AF not working through a true linear polariser - whereas most film cameras were manually focused anyway.

Although I can't say I understand the ability of a circular one to have the desired polarising effect and yet not disrupt AF.

Cheers,

[triggerhappy]

Not sure I understand the question. What type of filters are you referring to?

I was referring to digital camera filters and film camera filters.

Thanks Steve and Dave for the info.

I also bump on this reference. http://www.dpfwiw.com/filters.htm#why

Light is light, and flare is flare. Filters work pretty much the same with digital and film cameras, but there are a few practical differences worth noting:

Since digital cameras are more prone to blow out highlights than some films, filters that reduce excess contrast (most notably polarizers and GNDs) are particularly helpful on the digital side.

And since most digital cameras are considerably less UV-sensitive than film, ordinary UV filters seldom deliver a benefit worth the added risk of flare, but cameras prone to purple fringing artifact may be an exception.

Finally, infrared (IR) filters turn out to be far easier to use and enjoy on the digital side.

Beyond that, filters are filters.

I ask this one because there are cheap film filter here. I think its Kenko and Marumi. Both are around $15 each for 52mm. I am planning to buy ND-8 and PL filter. Do you think it is the right choice?


Mark

[Dave Humphries]

~ I also bump on this reference. http://www.dpfwiw.com/filters.htm#why

Light is light, and flare is flare. Filters work pretty much the same with digital and film cameras, but there are a few practical differences worth noting:

Since digital cameras are more prone to blow out highlights than some films, filters that reduce excess contrast (most notably polarizers and GNDs) are particularly helpful on the digital side.

And since most digital cameras are considerably less UV-sensitive than film, ordinary UV filters seldom deliver a benefit worth the added risk of flare, but cameras prone to purple fringing artifact may be an exception.

Finally, infrared (IR) filters turn out to be far easier to use and enjoy on the digital side.

Beyond that, filters are filters.

Hmmm, I wouldn't say polarisers "reduce excess contrast", but a properly used GND will. A polariser will certainly reduce overall exposure, and some things more than others, therefore arguably increasing contrast; e.g. removing flare/sheen from foliage or reflections from; glass, water or gloss paint, making these surfaces even darker than the attenuation of any highlights.

I do use a UV filter, mainly as a protector for the front element.

I ask this one because there are cheap film filter here. I think its Kenko and Marumi. Both are around $15 each for 52mm. I am planning to buy ND-8 and PL filter. Do you think it is the right choice?

Make sure they are multi-coated, make sure they are glass.
I would prefer to pay more than that for a CPL or ND-8 myself and get a recognised 'good' make.

Cheers,

[Klickit]

I'd be cautious about buying a very cheap filter. Like with lenses, you get what you pay for. I couldn't afford the really good ones, but went for a Hoya. I've been pretty happy with it. Just my 2c worth.

[coquidoc]

I'd like to buy a 58 mm circular polarized filter, don't want to spend too much but don't want a crappy filter either. Can anyone recommend a few brands? Thanks!

[Donald]

I'd like to buy a 58 mm circular polarized filter, don't want to spend too much but don't want a crappy filter either. Can anyone recommend a few brands? Thanks!

Hello. Hope you stick around this forum and join in discussions. On the basis of your spec list, I'd suggest you want to be looking at the likes of HOYA and SIGMA. But, I don't know where you are and how they rate price-wise in your country.

[Colin Southern]

I'd be cautious about buying a very cheap filter. Like with lenses, you get what you pay for. I couldn't afford the really good ones, but went for a Hoya. I've been pretty happy with it. Just my 2c worth.

I bought a cheap GND filter once and had a problem with it. Fortunately I was able to cure the issue with an easy 2-step process ... I took 2 steps and threw it in the rubbish bin. Problem solved!

[coquidoc]

Hello. Hope you stick around this forum and join in discussions. On the basis of your spec list, I'd suggest you want to be looking at the likes of HOYA and SIGMA. But, I don't know where you are and how they rate price-wise in your country.

Thanks! I'm in the USA, recently bought my first SLR, a Canon rebel, so I'm a novice. Thinking of getting a Hoya, there's a cheap one for $38, Mfr Part B58CRPLGB, which I'm assuming has a single coating.

[Donald]

Like all photographic equipment, there's a trade-off between the size of your budget and the grade of equipment you buy. Often there's not a great deal to be gained by paying a lot more, sometimes there is. With filters, I think there's a very direct relationship between cost and quality. So, buying cheap can be a false economy.

I think you need to treat filters the same way as you would a lens. After all, it's the thing that light is going to be passing through to reach the sensor on your camera. So you want the best that you can afford.

[Dave Humphries]

I think you need to treat filters the same way as you would a lens. After all, it's the thing that light is going to be passing through to reach the sensor on your camera. So you want the best that you can afford.

I agree, and personally use Hoya, but I go for the mid-range Pro-1 Digital series.

I went to the Hoya website to try to find the difference, I didn't succeed in that aim, but I did find this; explaining how their filters are made and why they're so much better than everyone else's
I don't doubt some of the shortcuts supposedly taken by other manufacturers are (or were) true (particularly for unbranded parts), but I doubt they apply to all Hoya's competitors. Never-the-less, it makes an enlightening read.

In UK, I have found Amazon to offer best prices for filters (and they're reliable), interestingly, the Pro-1 is actually a few pounds cheaper than the generic Hoya, but that appears to be due to volume of sales.

Cheers,