earleygallery Posted June 21, 2011 Share #21 Posted June 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Once again a long thread with lots of people stating that a filter degrades the lens quality (one filter, not the extreme example shown) but no photos offered to show us the 'difference'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Hi earleygallery, 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!
ho_co Posted June 22, 2011 Share #22 Posted June 22, 2011 ... 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. At one time Sean Reid thought Schneider (B+W) would make the UV/IR-cut filters for Leica, but that has turned out not to be the case. It's been reported on his site and here that at least those filters aren't made by B+W. In addition, the fact that my free M8 filters were labeled on the customs declaration as made in Japan. Please, John, I'm simply restating Leica's argument as to what makes their filters different. I'm not expressing a preference. Leica's point is simply that stressing the glass wafer can cause optical problems. As for the coatings, some manufacturers make a big deal of their coatings and others don't. We are only guessing when we say that Leica's filters don't use the latest coating technology. Personally, I use Leica and B+W and even Hoya and Tiffen filters (the latter on non-Leica products). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted June 22, 2011 Share #23 Posted June 22, 2011 James, I think we'd all agree that a single filter won't degrade an image visibly. But the fact that a single filter does introduce image degradation is indicated by the fact that multiple filters do cause visible degradation. The thread is talking about two different things: Does a filter cause image degradation? Yes, if to a minuscule degree. Do I prefer to use a filter nonetheless? Personal preference. And I agree with the basic point: Who cares? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted June 22, 2011 Share #24 Posted June 22, 2011 If I feel the shooting environment might include situations with extreme flare, I take off the filter. Otherwise, I always leave on the UV filters. I do not think a filter makes any perceptible difference in the final image. Hi I do the same I remove the UV filter when I'm takng night shots with e.g. street lights or profiles as the filter may make any flare worse, but this is just another way of saying extreme flare. Quandary when it is raining... Always use a lens hood as well. If a healthy sea gull gets your camera then removing filter and leaving it in a hand wash basin is good, not so convenient with a lens front element. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.