Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
  

Archive 2013 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or simila...
  
 
firstgear99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


I can't remember which thread I read about the 100-400 zoom being soft when UV or similar type of protective filter is attached to the front of the lens. Today, I attached the lens to my 1Dx and took sample shots with and without the filter.

Yes, I can confirm I saw a difference with the lens softer with the filter than without. My filter might have been cheap, maye that was part of the problem but a noticeable difference without. My lens will now be without. The filter used was a Hoya UV.

Thanks to those that commented that the 100-400 is known to be soft with filters.



Jan 19, 2013 at 06:42 PM
firstgear99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


Are there any other lens that also have this issue?


Jan 19, 2013 at 06:43 PM
eskimochaos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


Dont use UV filters on any lens.


Jan 19, 2013 at 06:46 PM
Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


eskimochaos wrote:
Dont use UV filters on any lens.


+1 million




Jan 19, 2013 at 06:53 PM
Jo Dilbeck
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


I have filters on all of my lenses except the 100-400, that is the only one where I can visibly see a difference.


Jan 19, 2013 at 06:54 PM
Paul Mo
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


eskimochaos wrote:
Dont use UV filters on any lens.


Will, you do realise that beginner photographers may be reading this and that what you wrote could be potentially harmful, don't you?

You have to offer more information and reasoning than that; the pros and cons, and alternatives.

With your experience I know you realise that the Canon weather sealed lenses are only such with a filter; UV or other.

I have filters on all my lenses. Sometimes I even like to reduce reflections and use a polarizer; have you ever used a polariser? How about a neutral density filter; ever?

Just be mindful of who may read flippant comments.



Jan 19, 2013 at 07:10 PM
diverhank
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


eskimochaos wrote:
Dont use UV filters on any lens.

+1 on this. Filters will affect all lens, some more than others for sure. I used to think there's no discernible difference but after careful testing I have removed all filters off my lenses. Like some of you, I was willing to pay almost triple the 24-105 for a 24-70 mk2 for that little bit of IQ improvement then why would I want to degrade it with a filter?

Like most, I baby my lenses and I can't recall ever bumping any of them against anything. I figure the lens hood will help in that regard. I'm not a working pro so I don't have time pressures or anything like that. I have seen subtle but immediate improvement in IQ without the filters. It also saves some money not buying them

Edit: as part of babying lenses, I don't shoot in bad weather either. I don't need to make a living at it so why risk my equipment in the rain or stuff like that. Regarding the claims that Canon lenses require a filter for weather proofing...is there any proof to that? None of my lenses manuals mention anything like that...




Jan 19, 2013 at 09:10 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


diverhank wrote:
... Regarding the claims that Canon lenses require a filter for weather proofing...is there any proof to that? None of my lenses manuals mention anything like that...


AFAIK, only the 17-40L needs a filter to complete the weatherproofing. Maybe the 24-105L too. A few others probably do as well, but it's the exception, not the rule.



Jan 19, 2013 at 11:12 PM
DavidP
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


My belief is that the UV filter causes slight changes in the ability of the camera body to focus properly, resulting in softer images.


Jan 19, 2013 at 11:36 PM
DavidP
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


jcolwell wrote:
AFAIK, only the 17-40L needs a filter to complete the weatherproofing. Maybe the 24-105L too. A few others probably do as well, but it's the exception, not the rule.


I believe the 16-35/2.8 II also requires a filter to complete the weather-proofing.



Jan 19, 2013 at 11:37 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



eskimochaos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


Paul Mo wrote:
Will, you do realise that beginner photographers may be reading this and that what you wrote could be potentially harmful, don't you?
.


The beginner photographer in question has a 1DX and multiple L lenses.

Furthermore, only SOME require a UV filter for complete weather sealing.

Sorry, what I wrote was not harmful, this is the internet and you must take everything you read with a grain of salt. It is up to the end user to absorb nuggets of key pieces of information and decided for themselves what it is they deem important or not.



Jan 19, 2013 at 11:40 PM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


eskimochaos wrote:
Dont use UV filters on any lens.


Sweet dude, come to Hawaii with your nekid tele 'n shoot big waves 'n surfers.

I use a UV filter, hood and damp towel when I shoot on North Shore beaches during big wave season (winter). After about 30 minutes my hair is stiff from salt mist and my sun glasses are useless until I rinse off in a beach shower. After the shoot I wipe down the camera and lens, remove the UV filter and rinse off it in the kitchen sink, padding dry with a micro fiber cloth. After a season of shooting I often need to toss the filter as it's too scratched to use. When I first started shooting on beaches I ruined the front element of a zoom trying to remove salt spray.


Edited on Jan 19, 2013 at 11:50 PM · View previous versions



Jan 19, 2013 at 11:49 PM
firstgear99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


Well, actually not beginner. Hobby photographer......

For years and years (>40) I have always had some kind of filter on my lens to protect them. Came in handy once when we went to a wedding, my wife opened the rear door and my lens had shifted on the back seat and took a dive to the ground. The filter was dented and cracked the filter. Nothing happened to my lens.

I do have a bunch of L lens and all but the 8-15 FishEye have/had a filter. The filter is off the 100-400. Are there any others? I haven't noticed other lens being soft, but I may have others. Supposedly the 100-400 is a known lens that doesn't like a UV or Skylight filter on it.



Jan 19, 2013 at 11:49 PM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


My EF 300 4L USM has a built-in filter which would be a bad idea to remove.


Jan 19, 2013 at 11:52 PM
eskimochaos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


Gochugogi wrote:
Sweet dude, come to Hawaii with your nekid tele 'n shoot big waves 'n surfers.
.


OK, lets take it to an extreme where anyone with any common sense would use a UV filter. The OP is discussing using a filter on a telephoto.



Jan 19, 2013 at 11:53 PM
kewlcanon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


Don't use cheap UV filter.


Jan 19, 2013 at 11:54 PM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


eskimochaos wrote:
OK, lets take it to an extreme where anyone with any common sense would use a UV filter. The OP is discussing using a filter on a telephoto.


Not an extreme. It's my backyard! Albeit no filters on may pancakes since they're for indoor and bar shooting.



Jan 20, 2013 at 12:11 AM
macentropist
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


Protective UV filters have their time and place, when i am out hoofing it in weather for a great shot, i have a filter on. When i am in a controlled environment like my studio, i never use a filter.

It is not either/or

A time and place.

I did have CPS send me the 100-400mm to check out for ten days, and took it out for 3-4 good outdoor shoots with a 77mm B+W MRC filter on the whole time, and was non plussed with the results, so did not purchase the lens. If any lens should cry out for a protective filter, this beast should be on the list. I would hesitate to say any lens over 300mm should also be on the list.

+1 on not using cheap filters, B+W MRC being the bare minimum in my book.



Jan 20, 2013 at 12:24 AM
Ferrophot
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


I noticed an improvement in focus accuracy and sharpness when I took the UV filter off my 100-400L. Not so with my other lenses. I don't use UV "protective" filters anymore, but always put back lens caps when finished using each lens.
I was using Hoya multi coated filters but found them devilish hard to keep clean and free of smudge marks, the main reason why I gave up on screw in filters.



Jan 20, 2013 at 12:29 AM
3iron
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · Thanks to those that commented on No Filter (UV or similar) on 100-400


I really interested in what was said about the UV filter being necessary to make a lens weather proof. Never heard of that, but, that is not unusual for me.
Could you enlarge on that issue or show me where I could find what lenses need or do not need this?
Thanks much.



Jan 20, 2013 at 07:14 PM
1
       2       3       4       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password