Save 15% On Excire Foto Software With Code: EXCIRE-EP

UV Filters

pulsar69 17 1.6k 6 United Kingdom
17 Aug 2010 11:09PM

Quote:Hoya do a crystal clear "protector" filter, it does nothing more than act as a layer of protective glass to put on the front of your lens and will not affect the lenses performance.

that james is what i am using and was used in the test . a hoya clear protector.
Nick_w Plus
14 4.3k 99 England
18 Aug 2010 9:36AM
A very interesting post. I ditched the UV filters a while back - except when in very adverse conditions (Like Donna Nook) - The reason? I did have problems with image quality, particularly in situations with a high UV factor - e.g. Seascapes. There was a noticable differance even on the camera review screen. What I noticed was quite a noticable clip in the blue channel - vey distinct, the histogram in the blue channel looked like it fell of a cliff in the highlights region, it also affected the cameras auto white balance (not a major issue) - the only time I now use UV's are as an extra lens protector in the camera bag.

I will be looking at the clear class option as I'm very nervous about leaving the front element exposed (I didn't know they existed!).
pulsar69 17 1.6k 6 United Kingdom
18 Aug 2010 11:33AM
yeah thats probably true , im no expert on light spectrums but i beleive that UV falls at the furthest blue end of the visible spectrum ( from hot to cold ! RED ORANGE YELLOW GREEN CYAN BLUE VIOLET ) and using this you can often accurately guess a white balance setting in a room from the colour of light that is being given out ie 2500k being cold and 10,000k being hot - 6500 normal white temp ? , so consequently would expect some clipping whilst using a UV filter , though as ive probably said i dont use them anyway , mainly doing weddings and some landscape i find the clear filter to be much less trouble , being faced with sodium , halogen , tungsten and flourescent lighting at some venues a UV filter just serves to confuse matters even more if left on.
LenShepherd 13 4.4k United Kingdom
20 Aug 2010 11:55AM

Quote:i have clear glass and uv pro hoya digital filters on all my lenses and challenge anyone who says they degrade quality to show me some real life proof of that ... unless we are talking cheapo jessops filters in which case they may degrade the image ?

some tests


Some sites say a lot about the owner.
Why photgraph the moon through a pol?
Why photograph a target at 45 degrees to the sensor - and likely to induce mis focus?
Ignoring the site why say "and challenge anyone who says they degrade quality to show me some real life proof of that"" when images have been posted in the thread showing there is degradation in the posted images Wink
pulsar69 17 1.6k 6 United Kingdom
20 Aug 2010 12:19PM
Why not read the thread properly before making comments ? , i challenged people to prove there was degradation , they did prove it , after which i also did my own tests and they also proved there was a small amount , tho nowhere near the threads which are posted and have been referred to online , therefore my claim was disproven which i have happily admitted too, so there is no need to carry on the discussion unless you have something useful to add ?
theorderingone 17 2.4k
20 Aug 2010 12:57PM
I personally don't use filters on any of my lenses. I can understand why others do though.

All of my lenses have scratches on them, but you'd be surprised how much scratching a lens can have before you really start to notice a difference. The occasional bit of extra flare seems to be the only problem I run into, I'd get that with most filters anyway.
66tricky 14 742 Scotland
21 Aug 2010 12:52AM

Quote:im no expert on light spectrums but....

Are you a London Cabbie? Wink
pulsar69 17 1.6k 6 United Kingdom
21 Aug 2010 11:12PM

Quote:im no expert on light spectrums but....

Are you a London Cabbie? Wink

Lol nice reply Tongue
Phil1958 12 272 4 Wales
23 Aug 2010 2:34PM
As has been said, a filter protects your lens - case in question, a friend of mine was at a school ROA evening recently, camera in bag, filter on lens. He was sat in a row with other parents and had the bag on the floor by his feet - we've all done it. Enter clumsy parent in high heels leaving early - stands on bag on her way out. Result? Broken filter - lens in tact, no filter, possibly broken lens. The cost of replacement - 20.00 for a new filter. A UV works better on digital as the auto white balance will adjust to compensate for a skylight filter so the only real purpose of a skylight filter on digital is purely lens protection.
Late 11 9
30 Aug 2010 3:09AM
The image quality problem with filters is not so much a loss of sharpness, but flare and ghosting (as LenShepard has said) which can be very noticeable indeed - even with the most expensive multicoated filters.

Sure there are sharpness issues too, especially with longer lenses (polarising filters are often quite poor here) and you can also get some strange bokeh problems with distracting patterns appearing in out of focus areas (longer lenses again).

But the biggest problem by far is caused when shooting bright lights against a dark background. Street lights, sunsets, car headlights, neon signs etc.

With subjects like these you get flare around the light source itself and, if you look very carefully indeed, a reduction in contrast over the whole image in extreme cases. Worst of all is the ghosting that LenShepard mentioned, which is a digital effect caused when the image bounces off the mirror-like surface of the sensor, and then back again off the rear of the filter, creating a duplicate image.

Anyone that says filters don't cause any noticeable degradation has not tried shooting street lights at night! I have a protection filter, and use it when I need to - usually the only time is to protect from sea spray. Otherwise it stays very firmly in the bottom of my bag.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.