adan Posted June 17, 2011 Share #1 Â Posted June 17, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) LensRentals.com - Good Times with Bad Filters Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 Hi adan, Take a look here So you're OK with using filters on your lenses?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
earleygallery Posted June 17, 2011 Share #2  Posted June 17, 2011 EXCELLENT!!!!!  Now anyone with any camera/lens can get that 'Leica Glow' by using 50 assorted UV filters  Very interesting, proves as always you get what you pay for, although I doubt any difference would be visible with just one filter of any brand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted June 17, 2011 Share #3 Â Posted June 17, 2011 An entertainng and enjoyable read. Â But a serious point seems to be that a UV filter might have a more deleterious effect on a wider angle lens, because of the greater proportion of oblique rays. This would accord with my experience using my 28/2.8 PC Super Angulon R shift lens, with the oversize filter mounted in the lens hood. I might be kidding myself seeing what I want to see, but I think I get better results at maximum shift (with very oblique rays in a particular direction) without the filter. But apart from this example, I don't see a any problem with one high quality (B+W MRC) UV filter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted June 18, 2011 Share #4  Posted June 18, 2011 Andy, I really don’t get what this proves. (Absolutely nothing you don’t know already) One good quality UV filter will not effect the photo in any way one can see. Gee, I knew this 40 years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 18, 2011 Share #5 Â Posted June 18, 2011 If using a good filter on a lens is enough cause to negatively question the impact and quality of an image, well lets face it, it can't have been a very good photograph in the first place can it? Â Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 18, 2011 Share #6 Â Posted June 18, 2011 When quality really matters, off come the B+W UV filters. Almost all my lenses are Summilux and I feel they are best without filters when used wide-open. I wonder if Leica agrees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mby Posted June 18, 2011 Share #7 Â Posted June 18, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm subscribed to the no-filter-if-not-absolutely-necessary camp, use a filter less than .1% of the time; see some interesting points from LFI here: Leica FAQ; Need a UV filter? Â Best regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tietje Posted June 18, 2011 Share #8 Â Posted June 18, 2011 I felt an awful lot happier when a Leica UV filter was safely screwed onto my Digilux 2. Always worry about losing lens caps. Rather wipe the rain off my filter than my Summicron. I use a hood as well ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Valdemar Posted June 19, 2011 Share #9 Â Posted June 19, 2011 If I feel the shooting environment might include situations with extreme flare, I take off the filter. Â Otherwise, I always leave on the UV filters. I do not think a filter makes any perceptible difference in the final image. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted June 19, 2011 Share #10  Posted June 19, 2011 See some interesting points from LFI here: Leica FAQ; Need a UV filter? Best regards, Michael  That's not a link from LFI. Much as I respect, Andrew Nemeth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted June 19, 2011 Share #11 Â Posted June 19, 2011 You are right because the filter is at the very end of the lens and can catch reflection easier than the average front element which in most cases is inset some ways into the lens. This is the only off-side to a high quality UV filter I know of. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sm23221 Posted June 19, 2011 Share #12 Â Posted June 19, 2011 When quality really matters, off come the B+W UV filters. Almost all my lenses are Summilux and I feel they are best without filters when used wide-open. I wonder if Leica agrees. Â They must or else they would have built a filter (perhaps removable) into their lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
segedi Posted June 19, 2011 Share #13 Â Posted June 19, 2011 Leica does sell filters too, no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted June 19, 2011 Share #14  Posted June 19, 2011 Sure Leica sells filters. But, this subject is something that I have been reading about since the sixties. You are not going to see any practical difference in this ‘’quality’’ stuff with a filter. Maybe if you look at side by side 300% images on the computer you may imagine something…. but, this IS not representative of the final result. Searching for problem is a guarantee you’ll find something to worry about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mby Posted June 20, 2011 Share #15 Â Posted June 20, 2011 That's not a link from LFI. Much as I respect, Andrew Nemeth. Â He's quoting Leica Fotografie International, Sept 6/99, p37 at this link: "High mechanical resistance and chemical permanence (as well as maintenance of the optical qualities ) is achieved by means of a special plasma deposition technology. The resistance and adhesive power of the outer layer is so good that there is little likelihood of damage by environmental influences or persistant cleaning on the part of the user. Â Numerous abrasion tests have been carried out. There is one that uses a rubber eraser which contains up to 50% pumice-stone grains. The standard test is to rub backwards and forwards 20 times with a pressure of 1 kg. Afterwards, no scratches should be visible on the lens surface." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted June 20, 2011 Share #16 Â Posted June 20, 2011 Leica has always recommended against the use of filters. Â It's obvious that putting any piece of glass in front of a lens can't improve the optical properties of the lens, since the lens design is complete without that extra piece of glass. Â My practice (up to the M8's requisite filters) was to buy and carry a UVa for every lens but never to mount it unless needed--say, on the beach or in a windy rain. Â Â What surprises me is that Nikon's lens instructions recommend putting a filter on every lens (where possible) and leaving it there. That's a real difference in philosophies between the two companies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted June 20, 2011 Share #17  Posted June 20, 2011 Howard, It’s again a personal preference. There is no question that adding another glass interface has an effect…. but you have to some sorta technical device to measure the difference. (By the buy, didn’t I see Tiffen advertising a new special filter with something like 99% transmission?) Personally, I’d rather clean a filter then a lens front element. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted June 21, 2011 Share #18 Â Posted June 21, 2011 When quality really matters, off come the B+W UV filters.... Remember that the B+W filters are less expensively constructed than Leica's. Â I don't think anyone other than Leica still makes filters the old-fashioned way, using a spring to hold the glass in place stress-free, as compared to the mass-production method used by most (all?) other manufacturers, in which a retainer is screwed down to hold the glass in the mount. Â The screw-down method can be automated, of course, and reduce construction costs--but at the expense of the possibility of stressing the glass. Â AFAIK, the spring assembly method can only be done by hand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted June 21, 2011 Share #19  Posted June 21, 2011 Howard, I did not know this so I’m glad you mentioned it. However, having used hundreds of cheap and expensive filters over all these years I have never had a filter break for any reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted June 21, 2011 Share #20  Posted June 21, 2011 Remember that the B+W filters are less expensively constructed than Leica's. I don't think anyone other than Leica still makes filters the old-fashioned way, using a spring to hold the glass in place stress-free, as compared to the mass-production method used by most (all?) other manufacturers, in which a retainer is screwed down to hold the glass in the mount.  The screw-down method can be automated, of course, and reduce construction costs--but at the expense of the possibility of stressing the glass.  AFAIK, the spring assembly method can only be done by hand.  Howard, I think I would say "differently", rather than "less expensively". One difference is the compliant mounting. Another difference is probably in the coatings (with the B+W MRC coatings this time giving them the edge). Conventional wisdom has it that B+W make the Leica filters on an OEM basis! I've always found B+W filters to be superb, and beautifully made. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.