Re: Filters and contrast
Anti-reflective coatings work by cutting the unwanted reflection/scattering/diffusion of light (where it should not go) at each and any air-to-glass surface. So the coating has to be wehere it can do its work, i.e. on each and any air-to-glass surface. Perhaps even between glasses of different refraction indexes. A filter in front of the whole lens cannot do that. Dario -Messaggio originale- From: CollinB Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 1:15 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Filters and contrast I noticed in the camera store review of the K3 that a comparison of the 2 versions of the DA40/2.8 displayed the difference produced by coatings, between (presumably) SMC and HD. Has anyone come out with a set of HD filters that might contribute a similar image improvement? -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3426 / Database dei virus: 3629/6834 - Data di rilascio: 13/11/2013 -- 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.
Re: Filters and contrast
Anti-reflective coatings work by cutting the unwanted reflection/scattering/diffusion of light (where it should not go) at each and any air-to-glass surface. So the coating has to be where it can do its work, i.e. on each and any air-to-glass surface. Perhaps even between glasses of different refraction indexes. A filter in front of the whole lens cannot do that. Dario Of course it can. Just not nearly as well or in the same fashion. Not all that the HD coatings does is anti-reflective. I suspect some of it is color-correcting as were the different SMC variations. -- 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.
Re: Filters and contrast
On 14/11/2013 6:28 AM, CollinB wrote: Anti-reflective coatings work by cutting the unwanted reflection/scattering/diffusion of light (where it should not go) at each and any air-to-glass surface. So the coating has to be where it can do its work, i.e. on each and any air-to-glass surface. Perhaps even between glasses of different refraction indexes. A filter in front of the whole lens cannot do that. Dario Of course it can. Just not nearly as well or in the same fashion. Not all that the HD coatings does is anti-reflective. I suspect some of it is color-correcting as were the different SMC variations. Collin, you can put the best filter in the world on an uncoated lens, and you will get flare because of internal reflections. All a coated element can do is keep reflections off of the element it is applied to at bay. Once the light has moved to another piece of glass, it's a whole new ball game. Lens coatings are primarily for flare protection. Any color correcting they do is secondary, though possibly by design. bill -- 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.
Re: Filters and contrast
Sendt fra min iPad Den 14. nov. 2013 kl. 13:59 skrev Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com: On 14/11/2013 6:28 AM, CollinB wrote: Anti-reflective coatings work by cutting the unwanted reflection/scattering/diffusion of light (where it should not go) at each and any air-to-glass surface. So the coating has to be where it can do its work, i.e. on each and any air-to-glass surface. Perhaps even between glasses of different refraction indexes. A filter in front of the whole lens cannot do that. Dario Of course it can. Just not nearly as well or in the same fashion. Not all that the HD coatings does is anti-reflective. I suspect some of it is color-correcting as were the different SMC variations. Collin, you can put the best filter in the world on an uncoated lens, and you will get flare because of internal reflections. All a coated element can do is keep reflections off of the element it is applied to at bay. Once the light has moved to another piece of glass, it's a whole new ball game. Lens coatings are primarily for flare protection. Any color correcting they do is secondary, though possibly by design. Or you may see it this way: Independent of the lens quality a filter will add two more reflecting surfaces reducing the overall quality. How much each of these surfaces reflect the light and reduce the quality will depend on the coating. Uncoated each surface reflect about 4% og the passing light. A surface with a good coating will reflect a lot less, but I don't have the numbers of the HD-coating. So the best solution is always to go without a filter if you don't want to protect the front lens. DagT -- 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.
Re: Filters and contrast
Collin, you can put the best filter in the world on an uncoated lens, and you will get flare because of internal reflections. All a coated element can do is keep reflections off of the element it is applied to at bay. Once the light has moved to another piece of glass, it's a whole new ball game. Lens coatings are primarily for flare protection. Any color correcting they do is secondary, though possibly by design. Bill Yes. You've probably shot more LF than me, and we both know what color correction filters can do for bw as well as enhancing color results, both neg and reversal. But. I'm thinking (though I might possible be wrong) that there might be an optical improvement to using the lens coatings on the filters. (Didn't Pentax even market SMC filters at one time?) We improve contrast with polarizers and UV/1A filters. Why not one more contrast improvement? -- 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.
Re: Filters and contrast
I took it to be filters as in a plugin for photoshop. like Nik Filters. On 11/14/2013 7:24 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: Anti-reflective coatings work by cutting the unwanted reflection/scattering/diffusion of light (where it should not go) at each and any air-to-glass surface. So the coating has to be wehere it can do its work, i.e. on each and any air-to-glass surface. Perhaps even between glasses of different refraction indexes. A filter in front of the whole lens cannot do that. Dario -Messaggio originale- From: CollinB Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 1:15 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Filters and contrast I noticed in the camera store review of the K3 that a comparison of the 2 versions of the DA40/2.8 displayed the difference produced by coatings, between (presumably) SMC and HD. Has anyone come out with a set of HD filters that might contribute a similar image improvement? -- 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.
Re: Filters and contrast
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:46 PM, John johnsess...@yahoo.com wrote: I took it to be filters as in a plugin for photoshop. like Nik Filters. The lens coatings slide right off those. -- 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.
Re: Filters and contrast
On 14/11/2013 7:25 AM, CollinB wrote: Collin, you can put the best filter in the world on an uncoated lens, and you will get flare because of internal reflections. All a coated element can do is keep reflections off of the element it is applied to at bay. Once the light has moved to another piece of glass, it's a whole new ball game. Lens coatings are primarily for flare protection. Any color correcting they do is secondary, though possibly by design. Bill Yes. You've probably shot more LF than me, and we both know what color correction filters can do for bw as well as enhancing color results, both neg and reversal. But. I'm thinking (though I might possible be wrong) that there might be an optical improvement to using the lens coatings on the filters. (Didn't Pentax even market SMC filters at one time?) We improve contrast with polarizers and UV/1A filters. Why not one more contrast improvement? We are talking about the same thing, except I'm drunk and you didn't catch on.. The best imaging comes when all surfaces are coated, even the cemented one, if I am not mistaken. bill -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 8, 2013, at 8:41 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: Be sure to shoot something with specular highlights in frame or backlit against a bright sky. That will test for flare. You also want to shoot something without specular highlights but with a strong light source just out of frame to test for veiling flare. It's less obvious but often more damaging than classic flare. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-03-01-12.shtml (Another Mike Johnston column from L-L back in the days when it was a regular must-read.) Thanks for this reference, Mark. “Specular” was unfamiliar. I checked it out. I understand it in contrast to diffuse. Not sure I could recognize “specular highlights,” though. -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net Imagining the other is a powerful antidote to fanaticism and hatred. - Amos Oz -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 8, 2013, at 6:49 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: And post the results of your tests. And that, too. -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence. - Charles Bukowski -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 2, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote: Years ago when I sold cameras, we had a dog and pony show put on by the various reps. This was back in the day when you could smoke in public, and I was, at the time, a smoker. The Pentax guy had a 50mm lens sitting on his desk, and he invited anyone who wanted to to butt their cigarette on the front glass. I think about a dozen of us took him up on the offer over the course of the day. The lens was completely unharmed by this abuse. Wow! No need of an ashtray, but don’t think I’d use any of my lenses that way if I did. -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net A writer is a person for whom writing is more difficult than it is for other people. - Thomas Mann -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Thanks to all who responded on this thread. Other matters needing my attention—and the sheer number of responses—caused me to leave the discussion alone for a while. But I really do appreciate all the input, the diversity of it included. I consider myself a bit more educated than I was before, which means I have to decide for myself. But now I some idea of the things that need to be taken into consideration. FWIW, I exchanged the 67mm haze filter for two 49mm clear coated filters and will use them with a hood. Perhaps at some point I will experience a problem with flaring, at which point I’ll reconsider. Sincerely, -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net A man should be in the world as though he were not in it so that it will be no worse because of his life. - Wendell Berry -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 08/11/2013 11:11 AM, Eric Weir wrote: Thanks to all who responded on this thread. Other matters needing my attention—and the sheer number of responses—caused me to leave the discussion alone for a while. But I really do appreciate all the input, the diversity of it included. I consider myself a bit more educated than I was before, which means I have to decide for myself. But now I some idea of the things that need to be taken into consideration. FWIW, I exchanged the 67mm haze filter for two 49mm clear coated filters and will use them with a hood. Perhaps at some point I will experience a problem with flaring, at which point I’ll reconsider. Take a picture with the filter in place. Remove the filter and take another picture. If you use a lens hood, it should be mounted for both pictures. Compare the pictures. This is one of those things where pixel level investigation is actually useful. If you see no, or negligible difference, then keep on with the filter. If it is causing image degradation, decide when to use it, or more to the point, when not to use it. bill -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 8, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote: Take a picture with the filter in place. Remove the filter and take another picture. If you use a lens hood, it should be mounted for both pictures. Compare the pictures. This is one of those things where pixel level investigation is actually useful. If you see no, or negligible difference, then keep on with the filter. If it is causing image degradation, decide when to use it, or more to the point, when not to use it. Thanks, Bill. I'll do it. Eric -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Be sure to shoot something with specular highlights in frame or backlit against a bright sky. That will test for flare. Paul via phone On Nov 8, 2013, at 5:25 PM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: On Nov 8, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote: Take a picture with the filter in place. Remove the filter and take another picture. If you use a lens hood, it should be mounted for both pictures. Compare the pictures. This is one of those things where pixel level investigation is actually useful. If you see no, or negligible difference, then keep on with the filter. If it is causing image degradation, decide when to use it, or more to the point, when not to use it. Thanks, Bill. I'll do it. Eric -- 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.
Re: Filters?
on 2013-11-08 15:36 Paul Stenquist wrote Be sure to shoot something with specular highlights in frame or backlit against a bright sky. That will test for flare. i would test in both difficult and easy situations to learn how these make a difference; i will remove a filter in special situations, but i leave it on 99% of the time i like B+W MRC filters because they are really easy to clean, and i do find spatter marks on them sometimes — both urban and natural environments can put tiny droplets into the air; i tried Marumi — good optical coatings for less money — but they are comparatively hard to clean -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 8, 2013, at 5:36 PM, Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: Be sure to shoot something with specular highlights in frame or backlit against a bright sky. That will test for flare. Thanks, Paul. I’ll do that, too. -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net Imagining the other is a powerful antidote to fanaticism and hatred. - Amos Oz -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 8, 2013, at 6:14 PM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: i like B+W MRC filters because they are really easy to clean After seeing several references to B+W fllters I decided to check them out. In the process I came across this: Schneider introduces new iPro Lens System for iPhone 5/4S/4 http://www.iprolens.com/index.php -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net Our world is a human world. - Hilary Putnam -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 06:30:22PM -0500, Eric Weir wrote: On Nov 8, 2013, at 5:36 PM, Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: Be sure to shoot something with specular highlights in frame or backlit against a bright sky. That will test for flare. Thanks, Paul. I’ll do that, too. And post the results of your tests. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 8, 2013, at 6:41 PM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: After seeing several references to B+W fllters I decided to check them out. In the process I came across this: Schneider introduces new iPro Lens System for iPhone 5/4S/4 http://www.iprolens.com/index.php I guess this is not news. Apparently it's been around for a while. Latecomer. -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net Our world is a human world. - Hilary Putnam -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: Be sure to shoot something with specular highlights in frame or backlit against a bright sky. That will test for flare. You also want to shoot something without specular highlights but with a strong light source just out of frame to test for veiling flare. It's less obvious but often more damaging than classic flare. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-03-01-12.shtml (Another Mike Johnston column from L-L back in the days when it was a regular must-read.) -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 11/3/2013 7:17 PM, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: But for a surprising number of lenses, the cost of replacing the front element is less than the cost of a mediocre filter, so don't worry about it. For older lenses, front elements may now longer be available. Then what? Then, you have to decide for yourself whether it needs protecting how to best go about it. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 11/4/2013 8:41 AM, John Francis wrote: On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 09:15:51PM -0800, Aahz Maruch wrote: Pieces of seven! Pieces of seven! Parroty error! Actually, seven has the same 'parroty' as eight. You might want to try Pieces of nine! instead; it's just as good as the original, and keeps the geeks quiet. You shalt not mock the mighty powers of two... -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 03/11/2013 11:11 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: On 11/3/2013 9:42 PM, Bob W wrote: My claim, and my years of experience back this up, is that for normal purposes nobody will be able to see the degradation without the type of equipment needed for conducting formal tests. Ergo for all intents and purposes, it does not exist and the filter does no harm. Nobody, in the 40 or so years I've been taking pictures, has ever looked at one of my photos and pointed out an image quality problem attributable to using a clear filter (other than internal reflections. Once), and I suspect it has never happened to anyone else either. I couldn't agree more. My A*600/6.6 came with a great big Tamron UV filter on it, which considering how much I paid for the bloody lens, I decided to leave on. I couldn't get a sharp image out of that lens no matter how hard I tried. I wrote it off to having insufficient tripod and head, though I was using it on a Zone VI wood tripod and whatever the big Zone VI head is (some sort of rebadged Manfrotto). Eventually I twigged to the possibility the filter was causing the problem so I removed it, and viola! instant sharpness. My wife has a little statuette of a Rottweiler puppy that now uses the 122mm Tamron filter as a display base. bill -- 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.
Re: Filters?
My A*300/2.8 has a filter drawer but has never had a filter in there, will my images magically improve if I put one in? :) On 4 November 2013 11:29, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: Interestingly, along a similar lines, my 600 (and other Pentax lenses with drop in filters) requires a filter in place for optimum performance although I've never tested to see effects without a filter. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: Re: Filters? Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? And I mean test with one filter, not ten stacked up. Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Here's the article I was referring to earlier: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- 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. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Guaranteed, if it's a Kenny Boy brand filter. Choose the Awesome model for best results. On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com wrote: My A*300/2.8 has a filter drawer but has never had a filter in there, will my images magically improve if I put one in? :) On 4 November 2013 11:29, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: Interestingly, along a similar lines, my 600 (and other Pentax lenses with drop in filters) requires a filter in place for optimum performance although I've never tested to see effects without a filter. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: Re: Filters? Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? And I mean test with one filter, not ten stacked up. Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Here's the article I was referring to earlier: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- 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. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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. -- -bmw -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Does your 600 have a drop in filter. If so is the filter in place? Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Filters? On 03/11/2013 11:11 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: On 11/3/2013 9:42 PM, Bob W wrote: My claim, and my years of experience back this up, is that for normal purposes nobody will be able to see the degradation without the type of equipment needed for conducting formal tests. Ergo for all intents and purposes, it does not exist and the filter does no harm. Nobody, in the 40 or so years I've been taking pictures, has ever looked at one of my photos and pointed out an image quality problem attributable to using a clear filter (other than internal reflections. Once), and I suspect it has never happened to anyone else either. I couldn't agree more. My A*600/6.6 came with a great big Tamron UV filter on it, which considering how much I paid for the bloody lens, I decided to leave on. I couldn't get a sharp image out of that lens no matter how hard I tried. I wrote it off to having insufficient tripod and head, though I was using it on a Zone VI wood tripod and whatever the big Zone VI head is (some sort of rebadged Manfrotto). Eventually I twigged to the possibility the filter was causing the problem so I removed it, and viola! instant sharpness. My wife has a little statuette of a Rottweiler puppy that now uses the 122mm Tamron filter as a display base. bill -- 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.
Re: Filters?
My A*300/2.8 has a filter drawer but has never had a filter in there, will my images magically improve if I put one in? :) No you'll have to press the shutter release ;+) Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Filters? My A*300/2.8 has a filter drawer but has never had a filter in there, will my images magically improve if I put one in? :) On 4 November 2013 11:29, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: Interestingly, along a similar lines, my 600 (and other Pentax lenses with drop in filters) requires a filter in place for optimum performance although I've never tested to see effects without a filter. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: Re: Filters? Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? And I mean test with one filter, not ten stacked up. Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Here's the article I was referring to earlier: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- 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. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Possibly. My understanding is that lenses with back-end filter drawers have their optics designed with the expectation that another piece of glass will be in the path of the photons streaming toward their final destination. Having no filter there is possibly degrading your images. On the other hand, I don't believe that more typical lenses with front-mounted filters are necessarily designed with the same assumption. So I wouldn't draw the conclusion that filters are universally a good thing. I've always assumed that the design compensation for a rear filter was a trade-off. Such lenses tend to require huge (expensive) filters. So, rather than make you bear the cost of expensive add-ons, they assume a (rear) filter will be in place and compensate for it. And probably design a set of the necessary high-quality filters that fit the drawer and conform to their design. Maybe I am giving the lens designers too much credit . . . stan On Nov 4, 2013, at 6:07 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: My A*300/2.8 has a filter drawer but has never had a filter in there, will my images magically improve if I put one in? :) On 4 November 2013 11:29, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: Interestingly, along a similar lines, my 600 (and other Pentax lenses with drop in filters) requires a filter in place for optimum performance although I've never tested to see effects without a filter. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: Re: Filters? Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? And I mean test with one filter, not ten stacked up. Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Here's the article I was referring to earlier: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- 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. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: Filters?
I think that's exactly right, Stan. Lens designers are quite smart. Godfrey On Nov 4, 2013, at 3:57 PM, Stan Halpin s...@stans-photography.info wrote: I've always assumed that the design compensation for a rear filter was a trade-off. Such lenses tend to require huge (expensive) filters. So, rather than make you bear the cost of expensive add-ons, they assume a (rear) filter will be in place and compensate for it. And probably design a set of the necessary high-quality filters that fit the drawer and conform to their design. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 04/11/2013 5:07 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: My A*300/2.8 has a filter drawer but has never had a filter in there, will my images magically improve if I put one in? :) Sure Rob. Your pictures need all the help they can get. bill you left yourself open for that one, didn't you? -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 5 November 2013 13:00, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote: Sure Rob. Your pictures need all the help they can get. bill you left yourself open for that one, didn't you? I know, I do still shoot Pentax (their bodies only for the most part ;) -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: Filters?
The manual for the A*300/2.8 doesn't say that it requires a filter in there. I imagine if a place holder was required by the A*300, it would have been supplied along with the lens. I have a Sigma 300/2.8 that came with a filter in there. Also came with a polarizer that fit in there a pocket in the case to hold whichever wasn't in the slot in the lens. On 11/4/2013 6:07 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: My A*300/2.8 has a filter drawer but has never had a filter in there, will my images magically improve if I put one in? :) On 4 November 2013 11:29, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: Interestingly, along a similar lines, my 600 (and other Pentax lenses with drop in filters) requires a filter in place for optimum performance although I've never tested to see effects without a filter. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: Re: Filters? Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? And I mean test with one filter, not ten stacked up. Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Here's the article I was referring to earlier: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 11/5/2013 12:45 AM, Bill wrote: My A*600/6.6 came with a great big Tamron UV filter on it, which considering how much I paid for the bloody lens, I decided to leave on. I couldn't get a sharp image out of that lens no matter how hard I tried. I wrote it off to having insufficient tripod and head, though I was using it on a Zone VI wood tripod and whatever the big Zone VI head is (some sort of rebadged Manfrotto). Eventually I twigged to the possibility the filter was causing the problem so I removed it, and viola! instant sharpness. My wife has a little statuette of a Rottweiler puppy that now uses the 122mm Tamron filter as a display base. bill I had similar problem with one of my lenses - it flared for as long as I had a rather cheap filter attached to it. Once removed, I kind of learned the hard way that the lens was rather flare resistant. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
The 'operating manual' that came with my 600 FA states that the front glass is called the PF (protect front) filter and is there to protect the front element. The PF filter is always recommended for use as it is designed to work as the part of the optical system. It makes no mention about the need to use a filter in the rear filter holder. The lens comes with 7 43mm filters including a normal, skylight, cloudy and UV along with yellow, orange and red. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Stan Halpin s...@stans-photography.info Subject: Re: Filters? Possibly. My understanding is that lenses with back-end filter drawers have their optics designed with the expectation that another piece of glass will be in the path of the photons streaming toward their final destination. Having no filter there is possibly degrading your images. On the other hand, I don't believe that more typical lenses with front-mounted filters are necessarily designed with the same assumption. So I wouldn't draw the conclusion that filters are universally a good thing. I've always assumed that the design compensation for a rear filter was a trade-off. Such lenses tend to require huge (expensive) filters. So, rather than make you bear the cost of expensive add-ons, they assume a (rear) filter will be in place and compensate for it. And probably design a set of the necessary high-quality filters that fit the drawer and conform to their design. Maybe I am giving the lens designers too much credit . . . stan On Nov 4, 2013, at 6:07 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: My A*300/2.8 has a filter drawer but has never had a filter in there, will my images magically improve if I put one in? :) On 4 November 2013 11:29, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: Interestingly, along a similar lines, my 600 (and other Pentax lenses with drop in filters) requires a filter in place for optimum performance although I've never tested to see effects without a filter. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: Re: Filters? Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? And I mean test with one filter, not ten stacked up. Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Here's the article I was referring to earlier: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- 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. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio . -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 3 Nov 2013, at 03:39, John Francis jo...@panix.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 10:44:06PM +, Steve Cottrell wrote: Just on he subject of cleaning lenses - I keep a clean handkerchief in one back pocket. Stout blow of hot breath on the element and a good wipe round with the hanky and hey presto. I do that with my A*85/1.4 (500 quid) and my Canon TV motorized zoom lens lens (5000 quid) and never had a problem. These lenses are a lot tougher than people think. I've heard stories of someone who used to demonstrate the toughness of SMC coatings by stubbing out a cigarette on the front element of a lens. That's a marketing gimmick, with nothing to do with real world use. The temperature tests the coatings, but in itself is probably not enough to test any glass, which depends on very high temperatures in its manufacture. The ash, paper and tobacco are not going to do any more harm than a wet lettuce. They should drop the lens from head height onto a rock or a pavement, or shoot road grit at it at the speed it flies up from beneath the wheels of a car. If it came away from that unscathed I might allow myself to be impressed. The link someone else posted showing a lens that had been scratched by a filter is probably, paradoxically, a good argument in favour of filters. - as long as you get one that fits the lens properly! B -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 2/11/13, Jack Davis, discombobulated, unleashed: I use a COTTON handkerchief or the tail of my COTTON t-shirt after a puff of not breath. Yea, cotton - good point. So, a puff of not breath is just a puff then. http://www.freewtc.com/images/products/ puff_sofa_with_bed_inside_15_12820.jpg That's a lot to carry around to clean lenses ;-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 2/11/13, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: I used to do that and after about twenty years of cleaning my vivitar 200/3.5 that way I gave it a good look and realized the front element was pretty much trashed. So now I'm cautious. Thats what you get for not buying SMC ;-) Wasn't there an advert or something once showing a cigarette being stubbed out on the front element of a Pentax lens or am I dreaming again? -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 2/11/13, Bill, discombobulated, unleashed: Years ago when I sold cameras, we had a dog and pony show put on by the various reps. This was back in the day when you could smoke in public, and I was, at the time, a smoker. The Pentax guy had a 50mm lens sitting on his desk, and he invited anyone who wanted to to butt their cigarette on the front glass. I think about a dozen of us took him up on the offer over the course of the day. The lens was completely unharmed by this abuse. There ya go -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 3/11/13, Boris Liberman, discombobulated, unleashed: Over here, your breath won't be as hot, you know :-). Mate - I can melt diamonds after some of the curries I eat. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Yeah, but with the stipulation that the puff be preceded by a Huff. This in honor of the Three Little Pigs. Please don't make me reach this far again, Cotty!(?) Jack - Original Message - From: Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Sunday, November 3, 2013 4:52 AM Subject: Re: Filters? On 2/11/13, Jack Davis, discombobulated, unleashed: I use a COTTON handkerchief or the tail of my COTTON t-shirt after a puff of not breath. Yea, cotton - good point. So, a puff of not breath is just a puff then. http://www.freewtc.com/images/products/ puff_sofa_with_bed_inside_15_12820.jpg That's a lot to carry around to clean lenses ;-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) | Web Video Production -- www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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.
Re: Filters?
We had Roger Cicala from LensRentals.com speak at our monthly Carolina's Nature Photography meeting. He talked about lenses - good ones, bad ones how to get the best of them. What I took away from his presentation is that if you have a really good lens where it's going to be very expensive to replace the front element you should invest in high quality filters to protect that front element. But for a surprising number of lenses, the cost of replacing the front element is less than the cost of a mediocre filter, so don't worry about it. What I didn't get was any definite kind of feel for which of my lenses have expensive front elements which could be replaced cheaply. I'm back. I hope. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
My sum up is: Don't bash your lenses around such that you have to worry about damage to the front element. I use filters when I think I need one for whatever reason; I don't otherwise. I don't think about it otherwise either. If I damage a lens, I pay to have it repaired or I replace it. It's just equipment and money. Not worth wasting so much mental energy on. ;-) G On Nov 3, 2013, at 6:39 AM, John johnsess...@yahoo.com wrote: We had Roger Cicala from LensRentals.com speak at our monthly Carolina's Nature Photography meeting. He talked about lenses - good ones, bad ones how to get the best of them. What I took away from his presentation is that if you have a really good lens where it's going to be very expensive to replace the front element you should invest in high quality filters to protect that front element. But for a surprising number of lenses, the cost of replacing the front element is less than the cost of a mediocre filter, so don't worry about it. What I didn't get was any definite kind of feel for which of my lenses have expensive front elements which could be replaced cheaply. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Here's the article I was referring to earlier: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? And I mean test with one filter, not ten stacked up. Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Here's the article I was referring to earlier: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Larry Colen wrote: Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? Personally, I don't spend much time doing testing of this sort. I find sources I trust and I certainly trust Mike J for this kind of thing and go by their tests. I have experienced this kind of effect in real life (I was just editing some of my shots from Ireland this morning and found some examples of this caused by a polarizer in broad daylight). http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 3 Nov 2013, at 17:59, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Larry Colen wrote: Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? Personally, I don't spend much time doing testing of this sort. I find sources I trust – and I certainly trust Mike J for this kind of thing – and go by their tests. I have experienced this kind of effect in real life (I was just editing some of my shots from Ireland this morning and found some examples of this caused by a polarizer in broad daylight). http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml Mike J is a good, persuasive writer, and talks a lot of sense, but what makes you think he's done any testing? This comment from the article seems to be the best he's got, and it makes no more sense than any other internet blowhard on the subject: Otherwise, why pay for an excellent modern lens and put another sheet of glass over it? Would you be happy shooting all your pictures through a windowpane? It discredits the whole article. B -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Bob W wrote: On 3 Nov 2013, at 17:59, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Larry Colen wrote: Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? Personally, I don't spend much time doing testing of this sort. I find sources I trust and I certainly trust Mike J for this kind of thing and go by their tests. I have experienced this kind of effect in real life (I was just editing some of my shots from Ireland this morning and found some examples of this caused by a polarizer in broad daylight). http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml Mike J is a good, persuasive writer, and talks a lot of sense, but what makes you think he's done any testing? If you mean formal, controlled, scientific testing, nothing. But informal testing, his years of experience and less formal testing, plus my own replication of the effect is good enough for me. And likely is good enough for anyone whose purpose is real photography and not laboratory-level quantifying of the effects. For those who need MTF graphs, etc. for scientific measurements then formal tests with proper controls are in order. -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 3 Nov 2013, at 18:42, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Bob W wrote: On 3 Nov 2013, at 17:59, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Larry Colen wrote: Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? Personally, I don't spend much time doing testing of this sort. I find sources I trust – and I certainly trust Mike J for this kind of thing – and go by their tests. I have experienced this kind of effect in real life (I was just editing some of my shots from Ireland this morning and found some examples of this caused by a polarizer in broad daylight). http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml Mike J is a good, persuasive writer, and talks a lot of sense, but what makes you think he's done any testing? If you mean formal, controlled, scientific testing, nothing. But informal testing, his years of experience and less formal testing, plus my own replication of the effect is good enough for me. And likely is good enough for anyone whose purpose is real photography and not laboratory-level quantifying of the effects. For those who need MTF graphs, etc. for scientific measurements then formal tests with proper controls are in order. I don't mean formal tests, and I'm not referring to the internal reflections under particular circumstances which are easy to recognise and deal with, and are not in doubt, but to the supposed degradation of image quality in normal use simply by sticking a (high quality) filter in front of the lens. There's no doubt in my mind that formal testing would confirm that the image is degraded, but that is a long way from equating it with shooting through a window pane. My claim, and my years of experience back this up, is that for normal purposes nobody will be able to see the degradation without the type of equipment needed for conducting formal tests. Ergo for all intents and purposes, it does not exist and the filter does no harm. Nobody, in the 40 or so years I've been taking pictures, has ever looked at one of my photos and pointed out an image quality problem attributable to using a clear filter (other than internal reflections. Once), and I suspect it has never happened to anyone else either. On the other hand, I have used my cameras in difficult conditions, and dropped them on numerous occasions, and the filter and / or hood has taken the punishment. Since the front elements were never damaged it's impossible to be certain that the filter or hoods saved them (like the claim that a crash helmet saved one's life), but on balance I find in favour of good quality filters. But I'm not going to get hung up on it and force my opinion on others. I'll simply have naysayers hanged, drawn and quartered instead. B -- 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.
Re: Filters?
But for a surprising number of lenses, the cost of replacing the front element is less than the cost of a mediocre filter, so don't worry about it. For older lenses, front elements may now longer be available. Then what? Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: John johnsess...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Filters? We had Roger Cicala from LensRentals.com speak at our monthly Carolina's Nature Photography meeting. He talked about lenses - good ones, bad ones how to get the best of them. What I took away from his presentation is that if you have a really good lens where it's going to be very expensive to replace the front element you should invest in high quality filters to protect that front element. But for a surprising number of lenses, the cost of replacing the front element is less than the cost of a mediocre filter, so don't worry about it. What I didn't get was any definite kind of feel for which of my lenses have expensive front elements which could be replaced cheaply. I'm back. I hope. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Interestingly, along a similar lines, my 600 (and other Pentax lenses with drop in filters) requires a filter in place for optimum performance although I've never tested to see effects without a filter. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: Re: Filters? Yup he lists exactly the situation I said you would see effects in. Other than that has any one actually done any side by side testing to see if they see any differences? Or is it just more fun to argue without being hampered by facts? And I mean test with one filter, not ten stacked up. Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Here's the article I was referring to earlier: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 11/3/2013 9:42 PM, Bob W wrote: My claim, and my years of experience back this up, is that for normal purposes nobody will be able to see the degradation without the type of equipment needed for conducting formal tests. Ergo for all intents and purposes, it does not exist and the filter does no harm. Nobody, in the 40 or so years I've been taking pictures, has ever looked at one of my photos and pointed out an image quality problem attributable to using a clear filter (other than internal reflections. Once), and I suspect it has never happened to anyone else either. I couldn't agree more. But I'm not going to get hung up on it and force my opinion on others. I'll simply have naysayers hanged, drawn and quartered instead. Oh, just learned a word - quartered :-). Can the naysayer be split into eight pieces then? Boris -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013, Boris Liberman wrote: On 11/3/2013 9:42 PM, Bob W wrote: But I'm not going to get hung up on it and force my opinion on others. I'll simply have naysayers hanged, drawn and quartered instead. Oh, just learned a word - quartered :-). Can the naysayer be split into eight pieces then? Pieces of seven! Pieces of seven! Parroty error! -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 09:15:51PM -0800, Aahz Maruch wrote: Pieces of seven! Pieces of seven! Parroty error! Actually, seven has the same 'parroty' as eight. You might want to try Pieces of nine! instead; it's just as good as the original, and keeps the geeks quiet. -- 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.
RE: Filters?
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Eric Weir 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. I've never used Tiffen filters, so can't comment on those. I use B+W, Contax/Zeiss, Heliopan and the top end Hoya filters. Nowadays I only use a UV filter, although I still have some polarisers. Haze filters are useful for, er, haze. There are 2 schools of thought on using clear filters for protecting lenses. One rational and sensible school of thought is that it is a good idea and doesn't do any noticeable harm to your pictures; the other is wrong, an abomination in the sight of the Lord, and should be dragged behind horses through the streets of olde Londonne Towne, then burnt on a pyre built from their land and holdings. Yea, verily. You may recall when we met up in Norfolk I had smashed the filter on the front of my Olympus. This is the sort of argument that convinces me that it's better to sacrifice a filter, even an expensive one, than to smash a lens. http://www.web-options.com/PeddarsWay/content/P0130002_large.html Nevertheless, I don't have a filter on the front of my Fuji X100, nor on the front of one or two of my Leica lenses, so perhaps I am a whited sepulchre, appearing beautiful outward, but being within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. If I were to buy a Leica MM I would probably want a variety of old skool filters, green, yellow, OG etc. B -- 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.
Re: Filters?
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.
Re: Filters?
On 2/11/13, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: the other is wrong, an abomination in the sight of the Lord, and should be dragged behind horses through the streets of olde Londonne Towne, then burnt on a pyre built from their land and holdings. Yea, verily. I stopped using filters for this reason -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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.
RE: Filters?
-Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Jack Davis 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 Burn him! Here's how to make the unknown known, or at least less bothersome. Take some pictures of the same things in the same conditions with and without filters. Compare and contrast. Decide. B - 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 Id 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. Id be interested in this groups thoughts. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Tiffen filters are often ok glass-wise, but often have cheap, aluminum mounts with sharply cut threads that can damage plastic and soft metal lens mounting threads if not handled carefully. They are also prone to getting jammed and being difficult to remove. Haze vs UV vs UV Haze for protecting a lens on a digital camera makes no difference whatever. All three are designed to filter out UV light scatter, which digital sensors are not particularly sensitive to. The biggest things to watch out for with filters is added flare and focusing issues. Some are improperly made and have some curvature or a wedge shape to their surfaces. Those can degrade image sharpness and cause AF issues. Even multicoated filters will add some flare potential and should always be used with a good lens hood. I saw flare problems and stopped using protection filters as a general rule in the early 1980s. But I do still use one from time to time depending on circumstances. Most of the time I just leave my lens unprotected except for a lens hood. I await the Mongol Horde of filter extremists and their flaming swords ... Perhaps I'll offer them tea. Godfrey On Nov 2, 2013, at 4:00 AM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: 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. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Bob, remember I wrote, however slight and bothersome unknown. Said concerns are not controllable. OTOH, I find filters often justified to achieve a photo effect sought. Jack - Original Message - From: Bob W p...@web-options.com To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' pdml@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2013 5:35 AM Subject: RE: Filters? -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Jack Davis 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 Burn him! Here's how to make the unknown known, or at least less bothersome. Take some pictures of the same things in the same conditions with and without filters. Compare and contrast. Decide. B - 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. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 2, 2013, at 8:35 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Here's how to make the unknown known, or at least less bothersome. Take some pictures of the same things in the same conditions with and without filters. Compare and contrast. Decide. Thanks, Bob. Guess I'll just have to experiment. But then I'm oblivious to noise eve when the image is loaded with it. Alas, the human predicament: We have to go with what we've got. Regards, Eric -- 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.
Re: Filters?
I stopped using filters for protection around the same time. A halfway decent filter turns a great lens into a halfway decent lens. Paul via phone On Nov 2, 2013, at 9:09 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi godd...@me.com wrote: Tiffen filters are often ok glass-wise, but often have cheap, aluminum mounts with sharply cut threads that can damage plastic and soft metal lens mounting threads if not handled carefully. They are also prone to getting jammed and being difficult to remove. Haze vs UV vs UV Haze for protecting a lens on a digital camera makes no difference whatever. All three are designed to filter out UV light scatter, which digital sensors are not particularly sensitive to. The biggest things to watch out for with filters is added flare and focusing issues. Some are improperly made and have some curvature or a wedge shape to their surfaces. Those can degrade image sharpness and cause AF issues. Even multicoated filters will add some flare potential and should always be used with a good lens hood. I saw flare problems and stopped using protection filters as a general rule in the early 1980s. But I do still use one from time to time depending on circumstances. Most of the time I just leave my lens unprotected except for a lens hood. I await the Mongol Horde of filter extremists and their flaming swords ... Perhaps I'll offer them tea. Godfrey On Nov 2, 2013, at 4:00 AM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: 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. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
That about sums up my opinion. stan On Nov 2, 2013, at 7:24 AM, Bob W wrote: an abomination in the sight of the Lord, and should be dragged behind horses through the streets of olde Londonne Towne, then burnt on a pyre built from their land and holdings. Yea, verily. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
I consider both haze and UV filters as correcting and have used both. UV especially come to mind when shooting at higher altitudes. Jack - Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi godd...@me.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2013 6:09 AM Subject: Re: Filters? Tiffen filters are often ok glass-wise, but often have cheap, aluminum mounts with sharply cut threads that can damage plastic and soft metal lens mounting threads if not handled carefully. They are also prone to getting jammed and being difficult to remove. Haze vs UV vs UV Haze for protecting a lens on a digital camera makes no difference whatever. All three are designed to filter out UV light scatter, which digital sensors are not particularly sensitive to. The biggest things to watch out for with filters is added flare and focusing issues. Some are improperly made and have some curvature or a wedge shape to their surfaces. Those can degrade image sharpness and cause AF issues. Even multicoated filters will add some flare potential and should always be used with a good lens hood. I saw flare problems and stopped using protection filters as a general rule in the early 1980s. But I do still use one from time to time depending on circumstances. Most of the time I just leave my lens unprotected except for a lens hood. I await the Mongol Horde of filter extremists and their flaming swords ... Perhaps I'll offer them tea. Godfrey On Nov 2, 2013, at 4:00 AM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: 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. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 11/2/13 7:24 AM, Bob W wrote: the other is wrong, an abomination in the sight of the Lord, and should be dragged behind horses through the streets of olde Londonne Towne, then burnt on a pyre built from their land and holdings. Yea, verily. you forgot the salting of the earth part and the foulest curse upon descendents, but yeah. Verily. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 02/11/2013 5:00 AM, Eric Weir wrote: 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. The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. bill -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Bill's right. For protection, buy a lens hood. It also improves contrast and reduces flare in your lens. Regards, Bob S. On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote: On 02/11/2013 5:00 AM, Eric Weir wrote: 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. The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. bill -- 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.
Re: Filters?
And big lens hoods impress the ladies. On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: Bill's right. For protection, buy a lens hood. It also improves contrast and reduces flare in your lens. Regards, Bob S. On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote: On 02/11/2013 5:00 AM, Eric Weir wrote: 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. The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. bill -- 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. -- -bmw -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 11/2/2013 9:22 AM, Bill wrote: On 02/11/2013 5:00 AM, Eric Weir wrote: 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. The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. bill That's been my approach ever since Paul Stenquist settled the question for me by saying something to the effect of, filters turn good glass into average glass. -- Walt -- 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.
RE: Filters?
I've always used UV filters on all my lenses, except the 600. Mine are all Pentax or top end B+W. I have polarizers for most of my lenses which are used when the occasion calls for them. Use to have numerous other filters when I shot film, which are mostly not needed now with digital. Filters have saved damage to my lenses on more than one occasion. -Original Message- From: Bob W p...@web-options.com Subject: RE: Filters? From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Eric Weir 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. I've never used Tiffen filters, so can't comment on those. I use B+W, Contax/Zeiss, Heliopan and the top end Hoya filters. Nowadays I only use a UV filter, although I still have some polarisers. Haze filters are useful for, er, haze. There are 2 schools of thought on using clear filters for protecting lenses. One rational and sensible school of thought is that it is a good idea and doesn't do any noticeable harm to your pictures; the other is wrong, an abomination in the sight of the Lord, and should be dragged behind horses through the streets of olde Londonne Towne, then burnt on a pyre built from their land and holdings. Yea, verily. You may recall when we met up in Norfolk I had smashed the filter on the front of my Olympus. This is the sort of argument that convinces me that it's better to sacrifice a filter, even an expensive one, than to smash a lens. http://www.web-options.com/PeddarsWay/content/P0130002_large.html Nevertheless, I don't have a filter on the front of my Fuji X100, nor on the front of one or two of my Leica lenses, so perhaps I am a whited sepulchre, appearing beautiful outward, but being within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. If I were to buy a Leica MM I would probably want a variety of old skool filters, green, yellow, OG etc. B -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 11:24:19AM -, Bob W wrote: From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Eric Weir There are 2 schools of thought on using clear filters for protecting lenses. One rational and sensible school of thought is that it is a good idea and doesn't do any noticeable harm to your pictures; the other is wrong, an abomination in the sight of the Lord, and should be dragged behind horses through the streets of olde Londonne Towne, then burnt on a pyre built from their land and holdings. Yea, verily. I feel that both schools of thought have merit. The vast majority of the time, a UV filter in front of my lens is not going to be the limiting factor in image quality, but a scratch or a chip on the front of the lens could be. In cases where I have the time to make sure everything else is perfect, and a UV filter would make a detectable (though probably not noticable) difference, I can take it off for a few minutes with little effort. If I were to only shoot in the studio, with hepa filtered air so that I never had to clean my lenses, or worry about incidental damage, then I wouldn't bother with them. If you are photographing something very bright in a dark environment, do take the UV filter off because the bright light will bounce off the front element then off the filter, and will show up in your images. To see this, just photograph the night sky, with the moon in it, particularly with it off center in the image. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 2, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote: The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. Bill's right. For protection, buy a lens hood. It also improves contrast and reduces flare in your lens. Thanks Bob and Bill, and to everyone else who’s replied. The pros and cons seem about equal. Still I consider myself informed. I have hoods for some of my lenses. Never thought of them as protection. My thinking at present is to go with them, but to acquire filters for corrective purposes—and for protection down the road should I change my mind. A couple of related questions: [1] Larry spoke of using a neutral density filter the other day. What are they for? [2] What’s your reaction to using a clean microfiber cloth to wipe a lens? -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net I can explain it for you, I just can't comprehend it for you. - Ed Koch -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Tiffen filters are often ok glass-wise, but often have cheap, aluminum mounts with sharply cut threads that can damage plastic and soft metal lens mounting threads if not handled carefully. They are also prone to getting jammed and being difficult to remove. Haze vs UV vs UV Haze for protecting a lens on a digital camera makes no difference whatever. All three are designed to filter out UV light scatter, which digital sensors are not particularly sensitive to. I'll confirm everything Godfrey wrote and add one more detail: ordinary lens glass filters out virtually all UV. I have a friend who occasionally shoots UV and he has to use a special fluorite glass lens to do so (it's an ungodly-expensive Nikon macro specifically made for UV photography). Flare from filters, especially non-multicoated filters, can be a real issue. Particularly veiling flare which isn't always obvious. -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 2, 2013, at 12:38 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: I'll confirm everything Godfrey wrote and add one more detail: ordinary lens glass filters out virtually all UV. I have a friend who occasionally shoots UV and he has to use a special fluorite glass lens to do so (it's an ungodly-expensive Nikon macro specifically made for UV photography). Flare from filters, especially non-multicoated filters, can be a real issue. Particularly veiling flare which isn't always obvious. Thanks, Mark. Just wanted to double-check my understanding: Ordinary lens glass without flyers filters out UV? -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net Imagining the other is a powerful antidote to fanaticism and hatred. - Amos Oz -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Eric, my first two FA Limited lenses came with matching SMC UV filters (one silver, one black to match the lens barrel colors). Beside these, I'm using only B+W filters. Normally my more valuable lenses have protective filters attached. Israel is a dusty country, thus I prefer to have to clean the filter and not the lens surface. Beside that, I don't see any visible image degradation. Off the top of my head, the filters may cause flare more easily if the lens to which they are attached is a wide angle one. Then, even if you use the hood (which I do all the time) due to the fact that the filter will effectively make the hood more shallow - the flare will be easier to catch. The to filter or not to filter is a typical big endian/little endian question - so if a debate begins anew, it goes on without an end... Boris On 11/2/2013 1:00 PM, Eric Weir wrote: 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.
Re: Filters?
On 2 Nov 2013, at 13:09, Godfrey DiGiorgi godd...@me.com wrote: [...]. I await the Mongol Horde of filter extremists and their flaming swords ... Perhaps I'll offer them tea ...and a filter-tipped Camel Godfrey On Nov 2, 2013, at 4:00 AM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: 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. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
I use a Pentax SMC UV filter on my A* 200 macro for lens protection, and I have not noticed any degradation in the image quality. Every now and then I wind up having to remove and clean the UV filter due to a major problem - like when the rig tips over and goes lens first into muck. It is a relief to be able to simply remove and clean the filter and not have to worry about the lens glass. Otherwise I don't bother with protective filters. If the lens is worth it and if you are using it in a setting where it could be damaged, it makes sense to use a high quality filter. I use Tiffen filters for other applications - generally BW film photography - and have never had any problems with them. A coated or multicoated filter would be est, though. Mark On 11/2/2013 7:00 AM, Eric Weir wrote: 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.
Re: Filters?
On 2 Nov 2013, at 16:05, Walt Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/2/2013 9:22 AM, Bill wrote: On 02/11/2013 5:00 AM, Eric Weir wrote: 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. The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. bill That's been my approach ever since Paul Stenquist settled the question for me by saying something to the effect of, filters turn good glass into average glass. Saying it don't make it so. B -- 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.
Re: Filters?
I can hardly see how a sword can be made from a lens filter... At best it can be turned to a shuriken... On 11/2/2013 7:09 PM, Bob W wrote: On 2 Nov 2013, at 13:09, Godfrey DiGiorgi godd...@me.com wrote: [...]. I await the Mongol Horde of filter extremists and their flaming swords ... Perhaps I'll offer them tea ...and a filter-tipped Camel Godfrey On Nov 2, 2013, at 4:00 AM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: 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. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 2 Nov 2013, at 16:38, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: On Nov 2, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote: The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. Bill's right. For protection, buy a lens hood. It also improves contrast and reduces flare in your lens. Thanks Bob and Bill, and to everyone else who’s replied. The pros and cons seem about equal. Still I consider myself informed. I have hoods for some of my lenses. Never thought of them as protection. My thinking at present is to go with them, but to acquire filters for corrective purposes—and for protection down the road should I change my mind. The broken filter I posted a link to was on a lens which also had a hood on. I always use a lens hood. A couple of related questions: [1] Larry spoke of using a neutral density filter the other day. What are they for? They reduce the amount of light entering the lens without affecting colour or tonality. Use them in bright sunlight if you want to open the aperture and shoot with a slow shutter speed. It's a bit like changing the iso setting. [2] What’s your reaction to using a clean microfiber cloth to wipe a lens? That's what they're for. B -- 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.
Re: Filters?
I make my swords out of ploughshares. B On 2 Nov 2013, at 17:15, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I can hardly see how a sword can be made from a lens filter... At best it can be turned to a shuriken... On 11/2/2013 7:09 PM, Bob W wrote: On 2 Nov 2013, at 13:09, Godfrey DiGiorgi godd...@me.com wrote: [...]. I await the Mongol Horde of filter extremists and their flaming swords ... Perhaps I'll offer them tea ...and a filter-tipped Camel Godfrey On Nov 2, 2013, at 4:00 AM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: 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. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
To clean a lens or filter brush lightly with a soft camel hair brush to remove particles. Then spray a small bit of ROR residual oil remover and wipe with a spotless microfiber lens cloth. Paul via phone On Nov 2, 2013, at 12:38 PM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: On Nov 2, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote: The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. Bill's right. For protection, buy a lens hood. It also improves contrast and reduces flare in your lens. Thanks Bob and Bill, and to everyone else who’s replied. The pros and cons seem about equal. Still I consider myself informed. I have hoods for some of my lenses. Never thought of them as protection. My thinking at present is to go with them, but to acquire filters for corrective purposes—and for protection down the road should I change my mind. A couple of related questions: [1] Larry spoke of using a neutral density filter the other day. What are they for? [2] What’s your reaction to using a clean microfiber cloth to wipe a lens? -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net I can explain it for you, I just can't comprehend it for you. - Ed Koch -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Eric Weir wrote: On Nov 2, 2013, at 12:38 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: I'll confirm everything Godfrey wrote and add one more detail: ordinary lens glass filters out virtually all UV. I have a friend who occasionally shoots UV and he has to use a special fluorite glass lens to do so (it's an ungodly-expensive Nikon macro specifically made for UV photography). Flare from filters, especially non-multicoated filters, can be a real issue. Particularly veiling flare which isn't always obvious. Thanks, Mark. Just wanted to double-check my understanding: Ordinary lens glass without flyers filters out UV? Yep. It's actually quite difficult to make glass that *doesn't* block UV. Hence the extremely expensive lens necessary for shooting under UV. -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
Re: Filters?
A couple of incidental notes: Scratches on the front element of a lens have *very* little effect on image quality (unless there are so many of them that veiling flare starts to reach intolerable levels). Scratches on the *rear* element of a lens are much more dangerous. Protect that rear element at all costs when swapping lenses! For those who wondered why my friend photographs under UV light at all, he's a forensic pathologist: he says UV is really good for revealing bite marks. I'll just take him at his word for that... But he's a very good photographer outside the morgue and has won prizes for his landscapes in juried competitions. -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013, Bill wrote: The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. There was a post a while back on lensrentals.com that said roughly the same thing. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 02:03:24PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote: A couple of incidental notes: This may be the out of context quote of the week: he's a very good photographer outside the morgue and has won prizes for his landscapes in juried competitions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Just on he subject of cleaning lenses - I keep a clean handkerchief in one back pocket. Stout blow of hot breath on the element and a good wipe round with the hanky and hey presto. I do that with my A*85/1.4 (500 quid) and my Canon TV motorized zoom lens lens (5000 quid) and never had a problem. These lenses are a lot tougher than people think. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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.
Re: Filters?
I use a COTTON handkerchief or the tail of my COTTON t-shirt after a puff of not breath. Jack - Original Message - From: Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2013 3:44 PM Subject: Re: Filters? Just on he subject of cleaning lenses - I keep a clean handkerchief in one back pocket. Stout blow of hot breath on the element and a good wipe round with the hanky and hey presto. I do that with my A*85/1.4 (500 quid) and my Canon TV motorized zoom lens lens (5000 quid) and never had a problem. These lenses are a lot tougher than people think. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) | Web Video Production -- www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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.
Re: Filters?
Same here. I usually do a very light swipe first in the event there's a grain of sand or something like that which could potentially be hard enough to scratch the coating, but after that, a couple of breaths and a cotton t-shirt works like a charm. -- Walt On 11/2/2013 6:57 PM, Jack Davis wrote: I use a COTTON handkerchief or the tail of my COTTON t-shirt after a puff of not breath. Jack - Original Message - From: Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2013 3:44 PM Subject: Re: Filters? Just on he subject of cleaning lenses - I keep a clean handkerchief in one back pocket. Stout blow of hot breath on the element and a good wipe round with the hanky and hey presto. I do that with my A*85/1.4 (500 quid) and my Canon TV motorized zoom lens lens (5000 quid) and never had a problem. These lenses are a lot tougher than people think. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
I used to do that and after about twenty years of cleaning my vivitar 200/3.5 that way I gave it a good look and realized the front element was pretty much trashed. So now I'm cautious. Paul via phone On Nov 2, 2013, at 7:57 PM, Jack Davis jdavi...@yahoo.com wrote: I use a COTTON handkerchief or the tail of my COTTON t-shirt after a puff of not breath. Jack - Original Message - From: Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2013 3:44 PM Subject: Re: Filters? Just on he subject of cleaning lenses - I keep a clean handkerchief in one back pocket. Stout blow of hot breath on the element and a good wipe round with the hanky and hey presto. I do that with my A*85/1.4 (500 quid) and my Canon TV motorized zoom lens lens (5000 quid) and never had a problem. These lenses are a lot tougher than people think. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 02/11/2013 6:25 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: I used to do that and after about twenty years of cleaning my vivitar 200/3.5 that way I gave it a good look and realized the front element was pretty much trashed. So now I'm cautious. I almost never clean lenses. It saves me the potential problem of scratching a lens element. The problem that happens when lenses are cleaned too often is that they develop cleaning marks, which is scuffing of the glass. Any lens will be ruined by being kept too clean. Your old Vivitar also had soft glass and coatings. Years ago when I sold cameras, we had a dog and pony show put on by the various reps. This was back in the day when you could smoke in public, and I was, at the time, a smoker. The Pentax guy had a 50mm lens sitting on his desk, and he invited anyone who wanted to to butt their cigarette on the front glass. I think about a dozen of us took him up on the offer over the course of the day. The lens was completely unharmed by this abuse. bill -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 10:44:06PM +, Steve Cottrell wrote: Just on he subject of cleaning lenses - I keep a clean handkerchief in one back pocket. Stout blow of hot breath on the element and a good wipe round with the hanky and hey presto. I do that with my A*85/1.4 (500 quid) and my Canon TV motorized zoom lens lens (5000 quid) and never had a problem. These lenses are a lot tougher than people think. I've heard stories of someone who used to demonstrate the toughness of SMC coatings by stubbing out a cigarette on the front element of a lens. -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 3, 2013, at 7:11 am, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 02, 2013, Bill wrote: The only time I use filters is when I need a polarizer. If you want protection, buy a lens hood. There was a post a while back on lensrentals.com that said roughly the same thing. I read this the other day... never thought it'd be an issue! http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/10/bad-times-with-bad-filters I agree with Bill, but that makes no difference to anybody but me :) Cheers, Dave -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On Nov 3, 2013, at 11:44 am, Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv wrote: Just on he subject of cleaning lenses - I keep a clean handkerchief in one back pocket. Stout blow of hot breath on the element and a good wipe round with the hanky and hey presto. I do that with my A*85/1.4 (500 quid) and my Canon TV motorized zoom lens lens (5000 quid) and never had a problem. These lenses are a lot tougher than people think. That's about all I've ever done in the field. A t-shirt will also do the trick if the hanky has been... used. Usually there might still be a bit of greasy residue so at home I use a tissue wet with some isopropyl alcohol to clean it, then wipe off any residue with a dry area of the tissue. I then blow the dust off with a blower brush. Cheers, Dave -- 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.
Re: Filters?
I've always got one of those glasses cleaning cloths in my pocket; if they're good enough to clean my glasses, then they'll do fine on my lenses too. No problems yet. Ciao, Pete Mac in Melbourne (back to lurking and wondering why I'd need a K3 when I'm still learning about my K5...) On 3 November 2013 15:36, David Mann dmann...@gmail.com wrote: On Nov 3, 2013, at 11:44 am, Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv wrote: Just on he subject of cleaning lenses - I keep a clean handkerchief in one back pocket. Stout blow of hot breath on the element and a good wipe round with the hanky and hey presto. I do that with my A*85/1.4 (500 quid) and my Canon TV motorized zoom lens lens (5000 quid) and never had a problem. These lenses are a lot tougher than people think. That's about all I've ever done in the field. A t-shirt will also do the trick if the hanky has been... used. Usually there might still be a bit of greasy residue so at home I use a tissue wet with some isopropyl alcohol to clean it, then wipe off any residue with a dry area of the tissue. I then blow the dust off with a blower brush. Cheers, Dave -- 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.
Re: Filters?
On 11/3/2013 12:44 AM, Steve Cottrell wrote: Just on he subject of cleaning lenses - I keep a clean handkerchief in one back pocket. Stout blow of hot breath on the element and a good wipe round with the hanky and hey presto. I do that with my A*85/1.4 (500 quid) and my Canon TV motorized zoom lens lens (5000 quid) and never had a problem. These lenses are a lot tougher than people think. Over here, your breath won't be as hot, you know :-). -- 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.
Re: Filters
The image set linked to was not mine, so I'm afraid I can't give you personal experience yet. If you have a Flickr/Yahoo account you can probably ask the photographer with a comment on the image you are referring to. After reading about this some time ago, I did procure a couple good quality 77mm polarizer filters (on circular and one linear) from off ebay for a total of $40. Somebody couldn't get them apart and sold them that way, as a set. (Wasn't that tough to get them apart.) Have not done any experiments with them myself yet, however. -- 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.
Re: Filters
Quoting David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com: Looking at the Cameron Fader ND filter for my 67mm lenses. Any one using a fader, and comments?? I've played around with a fader (I'm assuming that's the same thing as a variable ND filter) but not a commercial version. I took the the el cheapo route and mounted a linear and a circular polariser in series. By keeping the circular polariser fixed and rotating the linear one, you get a similar effect to a fader. I haven't used it all that much but it works well and I haven't noticed any objectionable colour shifts. Here's a shot taken using it. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1370864/_IGP0763-k5.jpg The two polariser combination is a bit bulky so I've been looking at the Opteka Variable Neutral Density Filter. It's affordable and gets pretty good reviews. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- 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.
Re: Filters
Read through this thread at PF: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-camera-field-accessories/89051-neutral-density-filter-faq.html The example pics showing the issue are gone now, but there is one here: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/consumers-corner/1123706-once-bitten-twice-shy.html#post8014944 Basically, the higher the amount of filtering, and/or the shorter the lens, the more likely you are to see an X in your shot. On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 6:47 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Looking at the Cameron Fader ND filter for my 67mm lenses. Any one using a fader, and comments?? Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- 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. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- 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.
Re: filters with chromogenic bw
Should work. For example, orange filter will pass almost no blue light. And sky will be black. Some special effects, related to different emulsions, will not be visible, IMHO. Gasha Nick Wright wrote: Will black and white filters work properly with chromogenic bw films? ~Nick -- 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.
