Filter Question

[BrittanyBB]

Let me start with.. this photography board is going to kill my bank account!!

After going through a few threads, I had decided that an UWA was going to be an "essential" lens for our upcoming trip in October. Because I had just been flown out of our community up north for surgery (currently living near the north pole with no hospitals) DH felt bad for me and agreed to let me buy a Canon 10-20mm lens however, now I'm going to need the 77mm filters to go along with it!

I am wondering what filters you guys typically use for Disney shots? I'm going to need to get a UV filter for sure, and most likely a polarizing one as well, but are there others that would be considered a MUST have?

If I keep this up, I might need to find more issues with myself so DH continues to feel sorry for me

 

[ukcatfan]

On an ultra wide lens, you could have problems with vignetting using a filter. There are usually slim versions available to help this, but that raises the price. You do not need a UV filter. They are only beneficial for protection and can degrade your image quality. To get a low profile UV filter that size that is decent, you could be looking at a hefty price tag. You might not want to use a CP filter either because the effect of the filter will typically vary across the frame when at the widest. I have even seen this at 18mm. Basically, I am saying that you might not need any filters for the new lens.

 

[BrittanyBB]

My husbands gonna love hearing that one!!
This is good news!! Now I can focus on the 58mm's filters for awhile.

 

[ukcatfan]

If you are not going to be spending on a filter, you should lobby for the lens hood if it doesn't already have one. I do not use Canon, so I am not sure.

 

[pointandshoot]

Hope you are feeling better.

Definitely two camps on filter usage. Some folks do not because they feel it reduces the quality of the image captured. They recommend using a lens hood for protection. Others will use them for protection, polarizing/color saturation, or creating longer exposures.

I rarely use them in controlled environments like a sporting arena or a dance shoot. But I was darn glad I had one on my lens when I was dog sledding and a rock flew and struck my lens and when my lens cap fell off while I was ziplining.

If protection is important, get a UV filter. Disney is crowded, people sometimes do not pay attention, and you can get bumped into.

Wide angle lenses do suffer from vignetting but if you shoot raw files or have a decent photo editing software you can fix it post. You can also center crop the image so plan for that when you compose the shot.

I sometimes use a circular polarizer at Disney for outside day shots. Unless you spend a fair amount of money for the slimline version like from a maker like B+W, expect some challenges on the edge of your photos. Even with he more expensive filters, issues can arise.

 

[boBQuincy]

Here is an image taken with Canon's 10-22 (at 10mm) with a polarizer (B&W). There is no vignetting but the effect of polarizing only part of the sky is apparent. Some dislike this effect, some don't mind, but it does occur with wide angle lenses.

FYI, I use Canon's lens hood for the 24-105(!) and still get no vignetting. I bought the 10-22 hood and then sold it since I already had one for my 24-105 and saw no reason to have another that was not necessary.

 

[boBQuincy]

Here is another taken with the 10-22 (at 13 mm) with a polarizer *and* a ND filter, still no vignetting as seen from the upper left corner. This also used the 24-105 lens hood. The polarizer was really helpful in reducing glare on the wet rocks and I consider one a must for any lens.

 

[Phil'sFrontier]

Can i ask Brittany, why do you need a UV filer? Is it for protection or other reasons? I have one but do not use it really at all because I would rather rely on the glass in the camera, and not wanting to put a cheap filter on.
I guess I think it would effect picture quality, maybe sharpness.
What are your thoughts on this?

 

[photo_chick]

My only musts are a polarizer and a neutral density filter.

I avoid UV filters and opt for a lens cap and lens hood for protection.

 

[BrittanyBB]

Can i ask Brittany, why do you need a UV filer? Is it for protection or other reasons? I have one but do not use it really at all because I would rather rely on the glass in the camera, and not wanting to put a cheap filter on.
I guess I think it would effect picture quality, maybe sharpness.
What are your thoughts on this?

For protection only really. A friend of mine had told me once I had purchased the camera to make sure I had UV filters for protection so I have always had one on all my lenses.... I have never even taken it off. Perhaps I will have to give it a try without the filter and see the difference in the quality and sharpness.

 

[rmdavis]

To piggyback on this thread, which ND filter do most of ya'll use?

 

[rreading]

And to further piggyback, can a polarizer serve as a nd filter?

 

[Experiment_626]

And to further piggyback, can a polarizer serve as a nd filter?

It does block some light, so you could think of it that way. But it would be pretty mild as such things go -- probably less than two stops. It might or might not be color-neutral as well, and an ND filter is designed to be so (although not all of them are, either).

Scott

 

[photo_chick]

And to further piggyback, can a polarizer serve as a nd filter?

A polarizer stops one kind of light waves. A ND filter slows all of them.

 

[boBQuincy]

Since I figured I would usually be using the ND and polarizer together I bought a 1.8 ND and use the polarizer for another two stops, so yes, it is kind of a ND filter in that respect.

 

[Phil'sFrontier]

For protection only really. A friend of mine had told me once I had purchased the camera to make sure I had UV filters for protection so I have always had one on all my lenses.... I have never even taken it off. Perhaps I will have to give it a trywithout the filter and see the difference in the quality and sharpness.

That's what I had heard also, but then after listening to the Nikonians podcast for a while they kept insisting on not using UV filters, for the reason that you are using a lens that may be over 1000 dollars. By putting a 50 or 100 dollar UV filter on there you are compromising all your pictures.
I have had no UV for the past few years with no scratches or nicks. The hood that comes with most lenses gives good protection I have found.

OK, I will stop bugging you now