UV filters :( Check this out.

[Stephen]

I've just taken the first two photos with my new Canon 100-400 IS lens. I had put the Kenko UV filter on that came with the lens and thought things looked a bit soft through the viewfinder. So sat at my desk and focusing on the front door (why walk any distance eh ) I took a shot with the filter on. Took the filter off and did the same shot again. Both shots taken in Raw at ISO 800 which gave me 250th sec at f5.6 and with the IS switched on.

As you can see the difference is marked. Needless to say I won't be using this UV filter again. Moral is buy a good quality filter. Putting a cheap filter infront of quality glass is a waste of time.

[Guest]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

That is quite revealing Stephen. As a matter of interest do you normally have a UV filter on you lenses and if so what make do you use. ? I normally have a UV filter on to protect the lens and use Hoya filters. By the way happy to see that your lens has arrived OK.

[Stephen]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

That is quite revealing Stephen. As a matter of interest do you normally have a UV filter on you lenses and if so what make do you use. ? I normally have a UV filter on to protect the lens and use Hoya filters. By the way happy to see that your lens has arrived OK.

Indeed it is revealing Dennis. At present I don't have any filters on my lenses, and it is essentially for this reason. All my lenses use a 77mm thread and to buy a quality filter of that size is rather pricey. Don't think because its Hoya you are OK either, because there are different qualities of Hoya filters and the best ones are very expensive. However I did once read of this phenomena with some UV filters, so took the one I had off, and I've never used one since. This is not to say that you or anyone else should have a noticeable difference in image quality.

I've found though that they don't stop dust on the lens, you still have to dust the front element from time to time. Also I find using a lens hood protects the lens from bumps etc. The same principle applies to the likes of Cokin type filters. When I wanted a ND Grad filter set, I bought Lee. I just had no confidence in the much cheaper Cokin ones.

[Guest]

[Stephen]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

[Pol]

Re: UV filters Check this out.


We both use those particular filters (Hoya HMC Pro1). David usually leaves his on the lens all the time whereas I tend to (try to remember) remove them, except if I happen to be on or near the beach or any other potentially windy/dirty environment.

I was once lectured firmly about NOT leaving the filter in situ by an ace photographer who I respect - so I took his advice. On the other hand, my husband prefers to leave his in place ... and I must admit I haven't noticed any significant difference if it's on or off. But I just can't bring myself to leave the UV or skylight filter on unless it's really necessary (eg - wind/beach etc), especially if I'm using a lens hood.

I also like to keep the front of the lens clean directly, rather than be cleaning a filter in front of the front of the lens.

I agree it's better to get the best protection filter possible though. We have no 'cheapies' afaik .... and we always budget for the cost of the decent filter each time we buy a new lens - David insists on it so who am I to disobey?

That one of yours is terrible, Stephen!

Pol

[Patrick]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

[coupekid]

Re: UV filters Check this out.


Firstly, wow Stephen!

Looks like you have a dodgy filter to me.

I can see a little difference in Patricks, but not enough to worry about, if i had to guess I would say 'A' had the filter on

[Stephen]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

Patrick, if I'm truthfull I can't see any difference in sharpness, however there is a slight colour difference. I'd say B was with the filter off but I'd be guessing.

[Patrick]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

Patrick, if I'm truthfull I can't see any difference in sharpness, however there is a slight colour difference. I'd say B was with the filter off but I'd be guessing.

That's exactly by thoughts, as a matter of interest the camera was tripod mounted, image A with filter, image B without, processed in Lightroom exactly the same, in fact used the sync option.

Says a lot about Kood filters, real value for money I would say.

Incidentally the lens is very impressive as well.


Patrick

[Jim]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

Staggering! I have never seen this before. Surely if that difference were normal, there would not be the never ending argument about whether or not to use a filter?
I think there must be something wrong Stephen. Shall I mail one of mine for you to experiment with? Or perhaps pop into your camera shop (will you ever be able to again with that lens?) and just try a couple of shots with a good quality filter on?

I have several makes of 77, and will happily send a few up to you. They wouldn't be away for more than a week and I can hack that.

Anyway, congrats on the lens, how did that go? C*st*ms and all? V*T?

Jim

[Stephen]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

Jim check your PM's

[Bearface]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

Wow, I'm genuinely stunned by the effect of that dodgy filter, however I suppose you can console yourself with the knowledge that it was included in the price of the lens, so you haven't really lost out financially.

Personally, I don't use UV filters at all; although I'm not for a minute suggesting that those who do are wasting their time. Like you, I've always found that a decent hood and careful positioning of the camera prevents most problems. I did have a couple OF UVs when I was a Nikon user, but I found that my images were naturally sharper without them fitted, so they were left in the bottom of the camera bag..............anyway, each to their own

[vlarcombe]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

Hi Stephen,

I've noticed a similar effect in the past but not to this degree.

When I was younger I used to keep a filter on my lenses "for protection". I stopped when I did some tests and realized that I was (marginally) affecting quality while I had never actually damaged a filter so probably would not have damaged a lens either. That was several years ago and I've still not damaged the front element of a lens (I'm now touching wood and crossing my fingers incase I've tempted fate )

Vernon.
(Consoled by the knowledge that my camera gear is covered by insurance).

[Stephen]

Re: UV filters Check this out.

Hi Stephen,

I've noticed a similar effect in the past but not to this degree.

When I was younger I used to keep a filter on my lenses "for protection". I stopped when I did some tests and realized that I was (marginally) affecting quality while I had never actually damaged a filter so probably would not have damaged a lens either. That was several years ago and I've still not damaged the front element of a lens (I'm now touching wood and crossing my fingers incase I've tempted fate )

Vernon.
(Consoled by the knowledge that my camera gear is covered by insurance).

This has been my thinking since I stopped using a UV filter, and certainly always using a lens hood has helped in protecting the lens from bumps and scrapes etc., and off course its good policy to use them anyway.

Having equipment insurance also gives you some feeling of security too