Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Flare if you dare...
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Screamin Scott wrote:
All filters will have an impact on IQ, how much depends on the filter & the shooting situation. Your best filters are no exception, they just may be a bit better in controlling flare & other distortion, but it's still there. I have always only mounted "protective" filters when there was either blowing sand or sea spray. Other than that, just limited use of special effects filters (like polarizers, ND or star filters)...I protect the front element of my lens with hoods & lens caps


I agree 100%.

Rino.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
koji wrote:
I do use a protect filter(not UV filter), here is an example.



Guess what the lens used, using Kenko protect filter (seven layer coating).
The sun is inside of this shot, unless i get too much ghosting I do not take
filter out. This was a test for ghosting.


And the pic without protector?

The protector alter the refraction and reflection light for which the lens and his coated is design for. The same for the uv filter but it eliminates the uv with a potential better sharpness and color. I don't agree but perhaps the UV has better reason to be put.

As Orio said (with Custer example) the better filter, not filter.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, I agree "no filter is better" completely. But to protect the lens
I normally use the protect filter I am not too worried about UV
cutting for normal dSLRs except M8.

I do not like to wipe bare front element of lens, this is the main reason
of using filters. And the second reason is my personal experience with
expensive (at that time) macro lens I still own. When I was focusing
very close to the subject, one of tree branches was scratching the filter.
Of course this filter was ruined but the lens was saved.

I did not shoot that scene without a filter, so there is no other shot.
Probably this would_be_shot might be better that that, but I am not
overly concerned much.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
estudleon wrote:

The protector alter the refraction and reflection light for which the lens and his coated is design for. The same for the uv filter but it eliminates the uv with a potential better sharpness and color. I don't agree but perhaps the UV has better reason to be put.


UV is only useful for film and only when you shoot in places with high level of blue refractions such as seashores or high mountains.
Otherwise, the colour cast inherent to all the films including the best ones, is much stronger than the colour cast of UV themselves.

For digital, blue cast due to UV radiations is no issue because it is controlled at the source by the white balancing.
Other thing might be the damaging effect of UV on sensors but I think that sensors are already protected with filters in the camera, no need to put one in front of lens for that.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:32 pm    Post subject: Foggy lenses Reply with quote
Good to see fast lenses being used in the dark - ! The Cosinon seems pretty dire, which is a bit unusual for a relatively simple triplet. I wonder if it's got a dirty surface somewhere? And am I right in thinking that the "cleanest" image at f4 comes from the Pentacon?

As for lens hoods, although they won't do anything to help light sources in the frame, they can still be useful for ones just outside the picture. If the post nearest the camera has a light on it, that might even be the source of some of the veiling flare we see in most of the shots.

As for shots looking as though they are taken in fog in Scotland - let me tell you our fog is FAR worse than anything here - !

A really interesting test - maybe if Sir_C gets the chance he will make another series without any filters and checking for clean surfaces?


PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 6:35 pm    Post subject: Re: Foggy lenses Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:

As for shots looking as though they are taken in fog in Scotland - let me tell you our fog is FAR worse than anything here - !


My closest experience to Scotch Mist was the day after consuming some heavy waters from the Islay. I can affirm that the Cosinon renders the world quite accurately under those circumstances. Only I should tilt the camera some 45 degrees Very Happy

scsambrook wrote:
A really interesting test - maybe if Sir_C gets the chance he will make another series without any filters and checking for clean surfaces?


The Cosinon is not that dirty. There is some visible dust and speckles inside the lens, but no haze or oil on the surfaces... Maybe I'll open it up and give it a cleaning.

I am planning to do some better testing in the future, now that I am in possession of a tripod and some more lensessss. However, with two small kids I enjoy darkness most with my eyes closed.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2