bitmaker wrote:
Like so many others, you are approaching the discussion from an absolute perspective. Again, common sense needs to be applied. Like lenses, cameras, and most things in life there are good filters and not so good. And there are times when a filter is needed and when a filter is more trouble than it\'s worth.
About your \"laws of physics\"... I have a 70-200 that resolves better with a L37C mount to it than without. Carefully tested on 1325/BH-55 using solid testing methods (MLU w/MC-30, high contrast target, etc.). Please post proof of how that\'s not possible in a lens/filter combo.
Greg
This topic has been forumed to death over at dpreview, P.O.T.N, Nikonians, Luminous Landscape and others. Believe me, you are the first person to proclaim better resolution with a filter, thereby shatering centuries-old laws of optics. Well done.
Nicholas
www.copperhillimages.com
Dec 03, 2009 at 01:30 PM
Previous versions of Nickle S.'s message #7847834 « uv filter ok when using flash? »
