Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lens Filters

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Lens Filters

    Perhaps, in light of some recent experience I have had, we could see a review and analysis of the pro's and con's of fitting lens filters?

    I have learnt that some fully appreciate and use them, whilst others remain sceptical.

    I have browsed many web sites extolling the virtues of filters, and others ridiculing them.


    Time for some proper investigation?
    Last edited by JaKS_Foto; 24-01-2014, 17:46.
    The camera works just fine, it's the idiot staring through the viewfinder that need's help!

    #2
    Re: Lens Filters

    Originally posted by JaKS_Foto View Post
    Perhaps, in light of some recent experience I have had, we could see a review and analysis of the pro's and con's of fitting lens filters?

    I have learnt that some fully appreciate and use them, whilst others remain sceptical.

    I have browsed many web sites extolling the virtues of filters, and others ridiculing them.


    Time for some proper investigation?
    I still think some professional view and analysis would be welcome on this subject, and would make a very interesting article for the EOS magazine.
    The camera works just fine, it's the idiot staring through the viewfinder that need's help!

    Comment


      #3
      Re: Lens Filters

      I have to concur, I have been seriously looking at the purchase of some lee filters and some guidance on usage and getting the best out of them etc would be really appreciated.
      Canon 1DX, 50D, EF500 F4.0 L, EF100-400 f/4.5-5.6L I , EF100-400 f/4.5-5.6L II, EF70-200 f/2.8L II, EF180 f3.5L Macro, EF 24-105 f/4L, EF17-40 f/4L, EF2.0X III, EF1.4X III, 430EX II, MR-14EX...

      Comment


        #4
        Re: Lens Filters

        We covered filters for digital cameras in the July-September 2015 issue of EOS magazine.

        It might be time to revisit the subject next year.
        Robert
        robert@eos-magazine.com

        Comment


          #5
          Re: Lens Filters

          Are the back issues available?
          Chris
          80D - 10-18 IS STM - 15-85 IS USM - 55-250 IS STM - 50 f/1.8 STM - 100-400L IS II USM - 100 f/2.8L Macro - 1.4x III

          Comment


            #6
            Re: Lens Filters

            If I understand correctly, JaKS interest is those filters that tend to be screwed to the front of the lens the majority of time, such as a UV, or skylight, or a protection filter.

            This came up some years ago and was hotly debated with those for and those against. To summarise the various views, there were those that wouldn't use them because they degraded the image (in their opinion) and those that did use them on the basis of protection. Much less expensive to replace a filter than have the front element of a lens replaced. It is also potentially less damaging to the lens cleaning dust and fingerprints from a filter. I fall into two camps: any of my lenses under 200mm have protective filters, any over 200mm do not have protective filters. Ever the diplomat!

            Now to Tony's query. The only filters from Lee that require any thought or explanation are the graduated filters. All of their other filters you will see the direct effect through the viewfinder, you may need to stretch to notice the difference with their polarising filter, but you can still notice the difference.

            Neutral graduated filters reduce the light over a partial area of the view. Normally used to limit light from the sky and you can slide them up and down in a filter holder to match the scene you are trying to capture. They come in two types: hard grads and soft grads. Where you have a definite horizon line, you would use hard grads. Where the horizon line is less defined, for example with trees or buildings, soft grads are the best option. The graduation is much softer and over a larger area on the soft grads. Whether hard or soft grads, there are also three strengths of each version, which equate to 1,2,and 3 stops. If necessary, you can also double, or even table up on the grads, providing 4,5 or 6 stops.

            In landscape photography, if you took the shot without any aids, the sky would be overexposed and the land underexposed. This is because the camera meter is trying to average the light hitting the sensor. Don't worry about partial and spot metering for the purpose of this explanation. Your eye and brain combination sees a higher dynamic range than a camera and averages out the scene quite nicely, with the correct range of light for the sky and the correct amount for the foreground. So, if you have a method of holding back the light from the sky by the correct amount, you should end up with the scene looking pretty much how it does to your eye.

            So how do you do that with neutral grads? Easier than you think. Point the camera at the scene and just let the foreground fill the viewfinder and note the exposure. Now point at the sky and note the exposure. Take one from the other and that will tell you how many stops of light the difference is. Load the appropriate neutral grad filter(s) into the holder, slide them up or down within the filter to suit the shot, then take the shot. If you are not so hot with maths and stops etc., point the camera to just the foreground and note the meter reading and then load filters until the meter reading for the whole scene is the same as your noted reading for just the foreground.

            A set of Lee neutral grads are around £200. There are less expensive ones on the market, but I understand they all have slight colour casts, which gets stronger when you double and treble up. Ok for the occasional use if your photoshop skills are up to removing colour casts, but if you are into landscapes, the Lee system is well worth the investment.

            Hope that helps.
            Colin

            Comment


              #7
              Re: Lens Filters

              Originally posted by ctrollen View Post
              Are the back issues available?
              Yes. See:
              Robert
              robert@eos-magazine.com

              Comment


                #8
                Re: Lens Filters

                Thanks Robert.
                Chris
                80D - 10-18 IS STM - 15-85 IS USM - 55-250 IS STM - 50 f/1.8 STM - 100-400L IS II USM - 100 f/2.8L Macro - 1.4x III

                Comment


                  #9
                  Re: Lens Filters

                  Originally posted by colin C View Post
                  any of my lenses under 200mm have protective filters, any over 200mm do not have protective filters.
                  Would be interested to learn your logic ... are you relying on the lens hood for protection on the longer lenses or are you simply ultra careful?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Re: Lens Filters

                    Originally posted by Enigma View Post
                    Would be interested to learn your logic ... are you relying on the lens hood for protection on the longer lenses or are you simply ultra careful?
                    You are very perceptive to ask why.

                    The answer is that protective filters are available for everything up to my 70-200mm F2.8. Any lens I have larger than that, the front element is far too large and nobody makes a protective filter. However, you also correctly reasoned using the lens hood for protection. The lens hoods on the larger telephoto lenses are very long and I keep them permanently attached.

                    Also, rather than using the cumbersome Canon lens cap for larger lenses, I spent some time in a kitchen shop going through Tupperware style containers, until I found a Tupperware lid that fits the Canon lens hood. On and off within a second, unlike the canon version. Total protection and ease of use. A little vanity did creep in though and I bought a Canon red stick-on logo for the front of the cap.
                    Colin

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Re: Lens Filters

                      Makes sense - thanks for explanation! I have the 500 or possibly 600 on my bucket list hence the interest ...

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Re: Lens Filters

                        Originally posted by Enigma View Post
                        Makes sense - thanks for explanation! I have the 500 or possibly 600 on my bucket list hence the interest ...
                        I went through the same quandary some years ago.

                        On paper, the 400mm F2.8 and the 600mm F4 was where I thought I should be for wildlife. I was fortunate enough that my pro shop had hire stock, so on a quiet day I played with them for a while. It soon became apparent that hand holding these heavy beasts for any period of time was going to be a problem and they would only be of any use to me in a hide, or with some form of support. Plan B was the 300mm F2.8 and the 500mmF4 and within reason, I could handhold these as long as I needed to.

                        As I like to hand hold, it wasn't a difficult decision.
                        Colin

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Re: Lens Filters

                          In contrast, I'm very much a tripod man for a variety of reasons. I bought a 400 f/5.6 last year but haven't yet had the opportunity to exercise it. I hired a 500 about 10 years ago for a Leuchars airshow and thought it was excellent although a 300 or 400 might have proved more versatile to be honest. Rather unsurprisingly it was fantastic with aircraft at a distance but they very quickly overflowed the frame and trying to catch an 'Arrows crossover with a 500 was just impossible ...

                          However, if it was easy then it wouldn't be so much fun!

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Re: Lens Filters

                            I know exactly where you are coming from. The 500mm is amazing, but there are times when it is just too much glass, hence the need for the 300mm f2.8.

                            To save changing lenses, I used an Optech harness with a mounted 500mm hanging from the right and the mounted 300mm from the left. A heavy overall set-up, but I didn't lose shots changing lenses. Just release one camera and swing up the other.
                            Colin

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Re: Lens Filters

                              Originally posted by colin C View Post
                              Also, rather than using the cumbersome Canon lens cap for larger lenses, I spent some time in a kitchen shop going through Tupperware style containers, until I found a Tupperware lid that fits the Canon lens hood. On and off within a second, unlike the canon version. Total protection and ease of use. A little vanity did creep in though and I bought a Canon red stick-on logo for the front of the cap.
                              Now that's an excellent idea. Bought a neoprene one for the hood of my 300 f2.8 but it never was a good fit and I stopped using it.

                              John

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X