First, there is the resolution reduction, however slight, caused by requiring the light to pass through two additional glass surfaces. For me, the filter glass clarity is a bothersome unknown. Jack
----- Original Message ----- From: Eric Weir <eew...@bellsouth.net> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2013 4:00 AM Subject: Filters? Midway in my walk back in September I replaced the lens cap on the A 28/2.8 with a uv filter. Recently I thought I ordered 49 and 67 mm uv filters [Tiffen] for use as lens protectors on two other lenses. When the order arrived I had two 67 mm flyers, one uv, one uv haze. My first thought was to return the haze, but reading up a little I thought maybe I’d keep it. In a discussion of uv vs. uv haze on photo.net, however, I encountered a diversity of opinions about filter vs. no filter and uv vs. haze, and strongly negative opinions about Tiffen. I’d be interested in this group’s thoughts. Thanks, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net "We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children." - Chief Seattle -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
