filters

[poorman]

Hi all id like to buy a filter for my 70-200 lens mainly to cut out the glare in pics but also looking into the uv filters not sure which way to go and is there a difference between the cheap filters to the hoya ones thanx Damo

[I @ M]

Damo, UV filters are not going to help you with flare. In fact, they might even add to the problem.

Flare is really quite a naturally occurring thing caused mainly by the strongest light source hitting the lens at angles other than straight on. You would be better off researching polarising or circular polarising filters.
You can also help alleviate flare by using the correct lens hood or a "shade" to block the light from one particular direction. That "shade" can be as elaborate as a large diffusion panel or as simple as your own held up to block the light.

[poorman]

Thanx mate will look into it a bit further cheers

[Roosta]

Hay Poorman,

I use Hoya and have a CPL for all of the 77MM lenses I use, well worth the money.

Think of it in terms to quality sunglasses, or cheap - you decide from there. Don't waste your money on UV filters mate.

There's also Graduated filters, used for land/seascapes. Google ND Graduated Filters for some research, or look on here (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm).

Look under Lens Characteristics and Camera Lens Filters.

[poorman]

cheers roosta

[ameerat42]

Has that lens got a lens hood? If so, have you used it in your flare situations?
Sometimes flare is inevitable, depending on light source and angles it hits the lens. I'm NOT SURE if SOME FLARE is polarised,
but if so, a CPL will help reduce it.
Any chance you can post a pic that shows what you mean?
Am.

(Edited to make a bit more sense than the original.)

[ricktas]

For a bit more info on UV filters. Back in the days of film, UV filters performed a much more important task. Film was quite susceptible to UV light, so using a UV filter was worthwhile on a film camera. Along came digital, which is not susceptible to UV light much at all, in part due to the low pass filter on the front of fairly much every camera sensor. Infra Red modified digital cameras, are those where the low pass filter is removed and replaced with an IR low pass filter. Remember that UV light is just light at one end of the spectrum and IR is at the other end, both not visible to the human eye, but they sit at each end of the rainbow.

So what did the manufacturers do with these worldwide piles of UV filters they had sitting around, they got their marketing guru's onto it and came up with the idea that the UV filter was still needed with digital cameras, to protect your lens front element. Most of the time adding this extra bit of glass or plastic in front of the lens, really just decreases the image quality slightly, it performs no other useful task.

Sure if you shoot on the coast with lots of seaspray, or on beaches with wind whipping sand around, a UV filter can be a useful protection device..for the front of the lens, not the side, or the camera itself, which the seaspray and sand will hit as well.

Get a Circular Polariser for your glare, reflection and also nice contrasty skies, you will enjoy it more. Be aware there are also Linear Polarisers. You need to ensure you get a Circular one, as Linear doesn't work with digital sensors.

[poorman]

just pick me up a kenco smart filter ( circular PL ) so ill see how it goes on the weekend and i run a hood too

[poorman]

Dam paid $99 bucks for it there on ebay for $49 rip by jb hifi once again

[arthurking83]

Damo, UV filters are not going to help you with flare. .......


Has that lens got a lens hood? If so, have you used it in your flare situations?
Sometimes flare is inevitable, depending on light source and angles it hits the lens. I'm NOT SURE if SOME FLARE is polarised,
.....

Damn!
Do I gotta learn 'yas two how to read'or'sumthinlikethat!

:D

the poor man .. actually I did mean poorman in both senses as you have conspired to confuse the chap to poor status, and his AP name seems to be poorman ... did originally say he wanted a filter to reduce glare .. not flare.


So did you pay $99 for it at JB, or on Ebay Poorman?

[poorman]

Paid the $99 from jb !!! Once i want it i buy it lol

[arthurking83]

Personally! I wouldn't worry about the price difference.
Yeah you 'paid too much' relative to what you could have got it on fleabay, but now you got it, that's it .. you don't have to pay for it any more, and it should last you years.
I have a polariser from over 20 years ago!
Look at the cost of it over it's lifespan.

One thing that could make a big difference tho is fake product.
It's not uncommon to assume you're getting a product cheaply on ebay, where the reality turns out to be that you got a cheap product instead.


And also, you got me thinking. What are( or were) you shooting where you're getting enough glare to need a polariser?

[ameerat42]

I won't try to gloss over it, so poorman, you can glare at me from a great height for misreading your "glare" as "flare".
Anyway, no matt-er: you got a free discussion of flare as well.

And so... perhaps next time post up some offending "glare" so we get it right.
:cool:m(wearing anti-glare glasses).

[arthurking83]

..... you can glare at me from a great height for ......

if he wears a pair of polarized glasses, will that mean that the glare he gives you will be somewhat diluted?

[ameerat42]

if he wears a pair of polarized glasses, will that mean that the glare he gives you will be somewhat diluted?

(Should be OK if we don't mention cross-polarisers!:shh:)

[poorman]

lol glasses was happy wth the result took out some of the bounce on the windscreen as a test with the car faceing the sun