• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Filter - which type? (1 Viewer)

Cristian Mihai

Cristian Mihai
My intention is to buy a 67 mm filter for my new Zuiko Digital 50-200 mm lens. I know a very few things about filters, so help my to choose one. UV or Polarize?
Thank you very much for help.
 
A polarizing filter is mainly used to reduce glare and reflections. They also make the sky more blue. I think if you looked on Wikipedia you would find a pretty good explanation of how they work and what they do. A polarizing filter, IMHO, is one of the few filters you still need nowadays - i.e. they perform a function that absolutely cannot be done with an image editor in post-processing.

Sine you have a DSLR, you will have to buy a "circular" polarizer, not a "linear" polarizer. They both are round - the "circular" word indicates how it is made and works. Unfortuantely, circular polarizers are quite a lot more expensive, but that is what you need for a DSLR.

As far as UV filters, they perform a minor function of removing haze, I think, but their main purpose is usually to protect the lens from scratches, etc. There is A LOT of arguing about this idea - some people use a filter to protect their lenses, others don't. I used to be one who used a filter, but I have changed my mind about it and now do not use one for that. I found that they did in fact degrade my images, so I stopped using them, but as I have said, it is arguable.

You cannot use a polarizing filter as a full-time lens protector (as you could with a UV), because it is too intrusive (you only use it when you need it).

One thing I can definitely say - you need to get a high-quality UV filter if you are going to use it to protect your lens. The lower-priced ones definitely degrade your images. I don't mean a particular brand - I mean you need to get one of the higher-grade UV filters of any brand.

With a circular polarizer, it may not be as important to get a super-expensive one, since even the cheaper ones are still pretty expensive and fairly good quality($40-50), and you usually only use them occasionally. Just my opinion, of course.
 
I bought a 67mm Kenko Digital Filter 'MC Protector' from the shop I bought my 50-200 lens from in the UK. They did me a discount (£10 instead of £30) as I bought the lens from them.

These aren't the most expensive filters (compared to say a B+W or Hoya Super HMC) but when I asked about this at the shop they informed me that Kenko owned one of the other big manufacturers (I think it was Hoya) so their glass was likely to be the same,

I have had no complaints, and it gives me piece of mind knowing that the front element is protected. I can live with a slight degradation in image quality, as you can compensate to a certain extent for loss of contrast in post-processing. Even if you didn't use one all the time it would be useful for sandy environments/salt spray etc.

Steve
 
I have a B + W MRC Clear Protection Filter on my lens. It is purely for protection and is precision ground from Schott optical glass. It was not cheap but the quality seems good. I tried some shots with and without it and couldn't notice any difference so I use it all the time for peace of mind.

Ron
 
Thank for comments Ron, Steve & RAH. I think I will buy a relative cheap circular polarizer. I found one from Kenko (it's about 45 $, VAT included).
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top