Expensive Filters, are they truly needed?

[gunawan]

Cheaper Always better. Pay more for filters = paying for the filter owner's ferrari instalments while you take mrt...

 

[calebk]

Cheaper Always better. Pay more for filters = paying for the filter owner's ferrari instalments while you take mrt...

Sorry, you lost all of us there. You'd rather compromise your image quality so the filter company owner doesn't get his Ferrari so soon? :dunno:

 

[havocidal]

Cheaper Always better. Pay more for filters = paying for the filter owner's ferrari instalments while you take mrt...

Sorry, you lost all of us there. You'd rather compromise your image quality so the filter company owner doesn't get his Ferrari so soon? :dunno:

He meant the person buying lower quality filter will be able to afford a ferrari sooner.

 

[spartacus.ret]

If you have the chance trying cleaning a Hoya HMC and a B+W MRC. Think you will notice the difference immediately.

hoyas always got stubborn stains, like in those washing powder advertisement :bsmilie:

 

[spartacus.ret]

Cheaper Always better.

yar, free flare!

 

[nahtanoj]

how much better? i'm getting a filter for my Tokina 11-16 and i'm unsure whether i should splurge on B+W or stick with HOYA Super HMC

As far as I know, u dun really need a UV filter, since modern dslr sensors itself already have some UV filtering. UV filters are only useful to protect the lens. As for reducing lens flare, I think adding any filter will only make lens flare more likely. If you want to protect the lens, you should just get a lens hood.

The only filter that u should get is a circular polarising (CPL) filter, it reduces light reflections in the scene and makes the sky and greener more vibrant. Since yours is a wide angle lens, u need a slim version to prevent any vignetting. Unfortunately the CPL filter is also the most expensive ....

IMHO, dun waste your $$$ on UV filters

 

[calebk]

As far as I know, u dun really need a UV filter, since modern dslr sensors itself already have some UV filtering. UV filters are only useful to protect the lens. As for reducing lens flare, I think adding any filter will only make lens flare more likely. If you want to protect the lens, you should just get a lens hood.

The only filter that u should get is a circular polarising (CPL) filter, it reduces light reflections in the scene and makes the sky and greener more vibrant. Since yours is a wide angle lens, u need a slim version to prevent any vignetting. Unfortunately the CPL filter is also the most expensive ....

IMHO, dun waste your $$$ on UV filters

And if the lens hood is shallow (which is the case with most wide angle lenses), and something happens to be long enough to scratch or chip your front element, I guarantee you won't be saying the same things you're saying now.

Have you tried B+W or Hoya HMC/SHMC filters? With them on, there is hardly any opportunity for flare to occur in images.

 

[Daedalus Trent]

Just a question though:

In one way or another, the general consensus is that cheaper filters tend to flare more :dunno:


But what about Polarizing filters? Someone commented on another thread that the cheaper brands (i.e-Tokina) were 'not dark enough', probably meaning they had less of a polarizing effect:


Can anyone shed light on this? I find this observation questionable :think:

 

[nottipiglet]

Just a question though:

In one way or another, the general consensus is that cheaper filters tend to flare more :dunno:


But what about Polarizing filters? Someone commented on another thread that the cheaper brands (i.e-Tokina) were 'not dark enough', probably meaning they had less of a polarizing effect:


Can anyone shed light on this? I find this observation questionable :think:

There's more to a polarising filter. I have used a Hoya CPL (uncoated) for years. I got it at $50 at TCW years back. It works well, but I find the colour a bit unnatural. I was learning how to use the CPL, so I wasn't fussy.

My friend got a cheapo one free when he bought his camera. He claimed that it did not have much polarising effect.

After a few years of experimenting, I'm eager to find out what's so good about a good CPL. So, I have just ordered a B+W Keasemann CPL, which is their top of the line CPL. I read that besides the excellent build quality, it also presents the most natural colours when the polariser is on. When I get it, I'll tell you if there is any difference.

 

[Daedalus Trent]

There's more to a polarising filter. I have used a Hoya CPL (uncoated) for years. I got it at $50 at TCW years back. It works well, but I find the colour a bit unnatural. I was learning how to use the CPL, so I wasn't fussy.

My friend got a cheapo one free when he bought his camera. He claimed that it did not have much polarising effect.

After a few years of experimenting, I'm eager to find out what's so good about a good CPL. So, I have just ordered a B+W Keasemann CPL, which is their top of the line CPL. I read that besides the excellent build quality, it also presents the most natural colours when the polariser is on. When I get it, I'll tell you if there is any difference.

ah...i see..

Thanks for sharing!

 

[NMSS_2]

He meant the person buying lower quality filter will be able to afford a ferrari sooner.

a good car (lens) without good wheels (filter) also... kns! :bsmilie:

 

[dimashp]

hoyas always got stubborn stains, like in those washing powder advertisement :bsmilie:

hi, i'm newbie in photography although i used to take film photos long time back. i get Hoya HMC UV at dirt cheap price. I used it for the sole purpose to protect my lense from scratch, dirt, etc.

i took a lot of photos and no flare occurs (except yesterday at jalan besar stadium where those stadium light are killing my cam). yet, just put on your hood and say bye bye to flare.

the only thing i hate from hoya hmc (not sure with the more ex b+w), it is damn hard to clean and once oil/water/dirt stay there. it is a pain. yes, it does affect the picture quality if those water stick on your lens and during those outdoor event as you'll find no time to clean it. but it is all worth it ! i got it at 15 bucks (2nd hand, though it looks like 1st hand, complete with case).

so, depending on what you need. if you are not a pro photographer (like me) and just want to 'sayang' or protect your camera, why do you need to spend so much ? but if let say b+w able to provide what hmc does not (in this case, easiness to clean at harsh environment) and if you really need it. then take it.

=D

 

[denniskee]

i am not sure how correct is this chart,

http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/Flare/FilterData.htm#[3