Filters...

Oakley

I really don't know much about them. I've always just had the one that was included on my 18-70mm - a SKY (IA) 67mm (whatever that means...) but now that I just got my new 18-200 I need to decide if I need to buy a filter for it (72mm).

I see there are different types for different occasions. But I'm not sure I need one.

1. Anyone know a good reasource on the web to get filter information? I haven't had any luck with google.

2. In today's photoshop world, do I really need a filter (or filter set) that will 'tweak' my photos? Or is the primary purpose of a filter simply lens protection?

Thanks!

Ryan

Scott_Quier

With PS, there's very little that you can do with filters that can't be done with PS. So, I would take a pass on most (if not all) enhancement filters.

But, there are two classes of filters that are difficult or impossible to duplicate in PS:

• Circular Polarizer - cut's reflections, tends to increase contrast of clouds in sky (depending on angle to the sun), enhances the greens of foliage, etc
• Neutral Density filters - used to cut the amount of light admitted to the sensor - good for getting slower shutter speeds when shooting warter, etc

To save expenses, get one filter large enough for your largest lens and one or more step rings to allow you to mount it on your smaller lenses.

Do you need a UV/Sky/Clear filter to protect the front element of the lens? In many instances, this is a religious question. But, when shooting at places like the beach, dusty environs, etc - it can save the front element (at the cost of a much less expensive filter).

When you choose a filter, put some money into it. In this, as with many things, the more you pay - the better the quality of the product. Though not a linear relationship, it is a direct relationship --> money:quality.

Oakley

Thanks for your reply Scott. Your info is very timley. Thanks!

Ryan

pyry

Scott_Quier wrote:

classes of filters that are difficult or impossible to duplicate in PS:

• Circular Polarizer - cut's reflections, tends to increase contrast of clouds in sky (depending on angle to the sun), enhances the greens of foliage, etc
• Neutral Density filters - used to cut the amount of light admitted to the sensor - good for getting slower shutter speeds when shooting warter, etc

Add graduated grays, some silly effects and redhancers to the list. The rest like colors and white ballance filters are only needed if you want to see the effect before taking the shot.

As for the silly effects, most are too silly to be of any use, you only really see them in filter catalogs. But I do have a friend who has bought a few clear glass filters and scratched them, he then uses them to produce a controlled highlight flare when he's shooting live bands.

Scott_Quier wrote:

Do you need a UV/Sky/Clear filter to protect the front element of the lens? In many instances, this is a religious question. But, when shooting at places like the beach, dusty environs, etc - it can save the front element (at the cost of a much less expensive filter).

I belong to the absolutely yes club. It's not just about dust, starting from removing a lens cap that is already in your pocket

UVs or protecting filters will save your day, question is when and how often.

Scott_Quier wrote:

When you choose a filter, put some money into it. In this, as with many things, the more you pay - the better the quality of the product. Though not a linear relationship, it is a direct relationship --> money:quality.

This is true, properly coated filters cause much less flare. Especially if you end up stacking them. Hoya's Pro1 Digital line is what I'd go for. And you don't need the filter to lose UV, there's a slightly cheaper option which is just a well coated clear glass, a pure dirt filter.

henryp

Oakley wrote:

Anyone know a good reasource on the web to get filter information?

Guide To Using Filters.

lightyear

Filters
I agree with an above comment that filter use/non-use may be a reliegious selection, but my faith is WITH filters. I prefer to spend my time looking through the camera and not at the computer screen, and prefer to create my image to the extent posible in camera, not in computer. The B&H Filter article is a brief excellent summary of filter use, but I can also suggest a book (now in later edition)by Joseph Meehan which covers filters in their entrirety in a very readable and well illustrated fashion. I lent it to a friend, hence cannot provide exact title. The book, written for film users originally equally applies to digital use, unless (as suggested by another -except for polarization and neutral density- you choose to do it at the computer). Good luck.
Stan

Designsmith

lightyear wrote:

I agree with an above comment that filter use/non-use may be a reliegious selection, but my faith is WITH filters. I prefer to spend my time looking through the camera and not at the computer screen, and prefer to create my image to the extent posible in camera, not in computer. The B&H Filter article is a brief excellent summary of filter use, but I can also suggest a book (now in later edition)by Joseph Meehan which covers filters in their entrirety in a very readable and well illustrated fashion. I lent it to a friend, hence cannot provide exact title. The book, written for film users originally equally applies to digital use, unless (as suggested by another -except for polarization and neutral density- you choose to do it at the computer). Good luck.
Stan

Stan

Are you referring to Complete Guide to Filters for Digital Photography by Joseph Meehan? My wife gave this book to me for Christmas this year and I’ve used a lot already. I find it helpful and I think that regardless of your POV re: pre vs. post treatment that it would be a good resource to keep handy. I tend toward doing as much as I can at the time I take the shot, but it make sense to me to use all of the tools available to produce a quality image.