which filter is used primarily to protect the lens This is a topic that many people are looking for. bluevelvetrestaurant.com is a channel providing useful information about learning, life, digital marketing and online courses …. it will help you have an overview and solid multi-faceted knowledge . Today, bluevelvetrestaurant.com would like to introduce to you UV Lens Filters: Necessary or Nuisance?. Following along are instructions in the video below:
“I m. Phil steele. One of the most common questions i get from new photographers photographers is about these clear lens. Filters.
Sometimes called uv. Filters or haze. Filters. Or filters.
Should you put one of these on your lens or is it just a nuisance that might detract from the quality of your photos. That s the question we re going to answer in today s video alright. Let s talk about clear filters. This is a highly controversial topic in the photography community and you ll find very heated arguments on both sides of the debate.
First there s the debate over whether you should use a protective filter at all and then there s a debate over whether you should use a uv filter or just a plain clear filter now we re going to answer the second question first because it s simpler in the days of film. It was very important to use a uv filter to block unwanted. Ultraviolet light. Because film is very sensitive to ultraviolet light and it can alter the look of your photo.
But digital cameras don t really have this problem at least not to the same degree. So on the question of whether you should use a uv filter or a plain clear filter. The answer seems to be that it just doesn t matter very much on a digital camera either one will do the job of protecting your lens. What s far more important than the question of uv versus clear is that you get a high quality filter.
Because good filters are not just a piece of glass high quality filters start with expensive optically pure glass. And then they have special coatings applied to the many layers not only to block uv light..
But also to reduce chromatic aberration and to reduce lens flares and to make the surface of the filter more scratch resistant so you can clean it it s the quality of the glass and the quality of those coatings that makes the prices of these filters vary so much you can find uv filters ranging from about three dollars to about 300. Now obviously it would be foolish to put a three dollar filter on a high quality lens. Now some people have a rule of thumb to spend about 10 of the price of your lens on a filter to protect. It now obviously that equation might break down at the extreme ends of the price range typically the filters that i use cost between 30 and hundred dollars and i m using them to protect lenses that cost between a few hundred and a few thousand dollars.
So when the question of clear versus uv. The answer seems to be it just doesn t matter that much as long as you get a high quality filter. But let s back up now and look at the bigger question of whether you should be using a protective filter at all there are some photographers who say you should never put a clear or uv filter on your lens. And they re quite vocal in expressing that their argument goes like this your lens was designed to work optimally.
Without another piece of glass in front of it. And by adding. A piece of glass to the front. You re only going to reduce the optical quality of your lens.
Even if it s just by a small amount and therefore reduce the quality of your photos. And that is unacceptable now on the other hand the argument in favor of filters says a high quality filter is not going to make a noticeable or significant difference in the quality of your photos. That s why you spend the money to get a good quality filter. But it will make a huge difference in protecting the front of your expensive lens and possibly saving you hundreds or thousands of dollars.
If you scratch or damaged. The front of that expensive lens and therefore this trade off is worth. It there s also a second more subtle argument in favor of filters that i find even more compelling and that is this over time. If you re not using a filter every time you clean the surface of your lens.
Which you can t avoid doing from time to time you re making little microscopic scratches and abrasions that build up and build up and build up over time until eventually the surface of your lens is doing more harm to the quality of your photos that a nice clean new high quality filter would do now i can really relate to this argument. I once had a lens an expensive lens over a thousand dollars and one day while shooting..
It got a little droplet of something on the surface of it now thankfully. I had a filter on the lyne. So the droplet was on the filter and not on the actual lens surface but when i tried to clean that droplet off with an alcohol lens wipe it just smeared and then later when i got it home and tried to clean it with lens cleaning solution it continued to just smear and wouldn t go away. So i took it to my camera shop and to see if they could clean it because this was a hundred dollar filter and even in their case with their tools and techniques and just smeared thinner and thinner and never quite went away and the protective coating on that filter was destroyed and the filter was just never the same again so i threw it away and i replaced it and i was really grateful that it wasn t my thousand dollar lens.
So since that time i ve pretty much kept protective filters on all my lenses. All the time with a few exceptions. There are some time when you re better off not having a clear filter on your lens and we ll discuss exactly what those times are in a moment. But first i want to take just a few seconds.
To tell you you can find all of my free photography. Tutorials including many that are not on youtube. And all of my full length photography training. Courses including courses on lightroom and.
Photoshop all on my website at steel trainingcom. Ok let s talk about the times. Where you may not want to have a clear filter on your lens first of all if you re using other filters. Then there s no point in having a clear or uv filter in the stack also we re primarily using it for protection.
And those other filters are providing protection. So adding a clear or uv filter to the stack. Just adds. An unnecessary piece of glass needlessly reducing the optical quality and creating the opportunity for lens flares also depending on the lens.
If you have a thick stack of filters it may actually cause some vignette accor neurs of your photos. If that stack sticks out too far..
So. If you re using other filters. You can leave the clear protective filter out of the stack. Another case where you may want to lose the filter is if you re shooting toward the sun or toward bright lights.
And the filter is causing a lens flare that you find undesirable and finally if you re taking the shot of a lifetime or making. A carefully composed art photo. And you may want to take the filter off. But for me most of the time i m not shooting art i mostly shoot events.
I m typically working around people who have fingers and elbows and food and drinks and in those circumstances. I m far less concerned about a hypothetical 1 decrease in my image quality and i am about protecting the front of my lens from getting smeared or damaged and of course. I started as a photographer at the burning man festival and you better believe out there i use the filter on my lens. Because i was often literally shooting in dust storms and even here at home in san diego.
I m often shooting photos near the beach. Where there s a fine invisible saltwater mist in the air. I sure don t want that on the front of my lens. So in circumstances like these it seems crazy not to use a protective filter on the other hand.
If i were shooting. A beautiful landscape photo and clear dust free air. And my cameras safely locked down on the tripod. Where it s not likely to get banged or splattered or anything then i see no need to have a protective filter on there and those circumstances possibly reducing the quality and so i might just take it off likewise if i was doing some astrophotography at night shooting.
The milky way and i want to get every photon that i can get and i want to reduce the chance of glare from stray lights. And i might take the filter off under those circumstances and get the cleanest shot that i can get to me this seems like the obvious..
No brainer solution. Combining the best of both schools of thought so when i get a new lens. I immediately put a filter on it so that that lens surface remains virgin and uncorrupted for all time. But on special occasions for very important photos.
I ll temporarily take the filter off from maximum quality best of both worlds. But the very fact that this solution is not obvious to everyone and that there remains a heated debate among photographers over filter versus no filter makes me think that there s something deeper going on here. There s a concept in psychology called negativity bias. It turns out we ve been hardwired by evolution in such a way that the pain of a loss is much larger than the happiness.
We would get from an equivalent gain for example experiments have shown that losing 100 is about twice as painful as the pleasure. We would get from winning 100. We re really wired to avoid risk and this makes sense given how we evolved. I mean we had to be super cautious and risk averse just to stay alive.
But it doesn t always serve us well now to have this lopsided risk reward ratio in our brains. So i think the answer to the uv filter question really comes down to this how much are you personally affected by negativity bias. If you re anything like me i know the pain of potentially scratching. My thousand dollar lens is much larger than the amount of satisfaction i would get from knowing i had that extra little increment of optical clarity in my photos on a fairly risk averse person by nature and i know that about myself on the other hand.
Maybe you re the kind of person who gets more satisfaction out of knowing that you got every last drop of clarity in every single photo and if you occasionally have to replace the lens and pursuit of that perfection then you re fine with that only you can know the answer to this and that may be the ultimate bottom line and your decision of whether to use a protective filter or not i hope you found this helpful i look forward to talking to you again soon. ” ..
Thank you for watching all the articles on the topic UV Lens Filters: Necessary or Nuisance?. All shares of bluevelvetrestaurant.com are very good. We hope you are satisfied with the article. For any questions, please leave a comment below. Hopefully you guys support our website even more.