|
|
Posted by PTravel on 03/13/07 03:24
"beowulf@nowhere.net" <r.oelerich@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1173740307.838953.278010@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 12, 1:15 pm, "PTravel" <ptra...@travelersvideo.com> wrote:
> ..
>> I always use a UV filter. Filters cost a couple of bucks. A lens costs
>> many hundreds.
>>
>
>
> That has always been my philosophy, and what I do with my cameras. But
> then a couple of people over on the dig photo usenet forums were
> saying NOT to do that, to just use the lens covers smartly, that
> lenses is scratched can be fixed with "lens ink" and that more damage
> can be caused by a broken lens filter scratching the lens, and then
> the risk of lens flare from using filters. It really goes against what
> I have always believed.
>
"Lens ink"? Lenses are precision ground -- a scratch is going to cause far
more image degradation and flare than a filter. As for flare, multi-coated
high-quality filters are not going to introduce any more flare than the lens
elements themselves.
I shoot travel video. My camera gets handled fairly roughly and in all
sorts of environments. The only time I use it without a filter is when I
have my WA adapter in place, and that's only because I haven't found a
filter thin enough to eliminate vignetting.
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|