Henry A Greenblatt wrote:.
For my new sigma 30mm f 1.4, the uv filters from all my canon 58mmlenses won't fit. Need a 62mm filter for the sigma. Prior Uvfilters were purchased with no knowledge of filters and looking onlyat cost. I'm willing to spend what I need to to not degrade thequality of the image I can make with the Sigma lens. Please give mespecific recommendations for a UV filter to keep on the lens all thetime to "protect" it. thanks,Hank.
To spend what you need to not degrade the image quality is easy. Don't spend one thin dime. If you really think a paper thin piece of glass will somehow protect the thick front element, I suppose it really doesn't matter what you buy. Have fun...
The argument about whether you should or shouldn't use a UV filter as standard will go on and on - personally I do use one but it's a matter of choice..
I would recommend the Hoya SHMC Pro-1 range http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1006132.
Confused of Malvern'The greatest fool can ask more than the wisest man can answer'..
Unless you are trying to keep spray / dust etc. off the front element, for which a filter is needed, a lens hood will protect it from random knocks.Best wishesMike..
I don't have a lot of filters but the ones I do have are all B&W. As far as I'm concerned they are the best. I have their UV Haze filter on my Canon EF 24-105 F4L and I'm here to tell you there is a visual difference in photos taken with and with out the filter. In every case I much prefer the ones with the filter on the lens. Just my 2 cents.'Longshot'..
Longshot, what is it about the photos with the filter that you prefer over the ones without the filter?I'm new at this and trying to learn, not challenging.Hank..
Henry A Greenblatt wrote:.
Longshot, what is it about the photos with the filter that you preferover the ones without the filter?I'm new at this and trying to learn, not challenging.Hank.
The photo's with the UV Haze filter have a cleaner color balance then those without the filter,especially those taken in the polluted NY City air where even on a bright sunny day there is a brownish gray hue to the atmosphere. What others are telling you about using a UV filter for lens protection is correct, there can be little argument with that,however;they will provide a barrier between your expensive lens and the dust and most other airborne contaminants that we encounter every day.'Longshot'..
I agree with you on the use of filters to do a task. For instance, I use graduated ND filters to lower the ev of sky, but we all know how to do that. I sometimes, but rarely, use a polarizer for contrasty skys..
I used to slip one on at the beach for protection. I don't anymore. I find that careful cleaning takes care of salt spray..
Personally, I've never seen a UV haze filter do anything. Digital cameras have a UV bandpass filter inside I thought. But, I'll take your word for it..
As for protection, the silly argument goes on and on. There will always be people who believe that degrading contrast for the sake of a paper thin glass protection is a good idea. There will always be people who think that the engineers at Nikon and Canon were wrong and that a good lens they designed shouldn't be 6 elements in 5 groups but should add some glass to make it 7 elements in 6 groups. LOL.
Just my 2 cents...