Does adding protective glass or Polarized filter causes loss in Picture Quality?

[trcns]

Does adding protective glass or Polarized filter in front of lens causes loss in Picture Quality? I just purchased 55mm f1.8 and 24-27 f2.8 gm, should I use lens protective filter or Polarized filter in front of them?  If yes, which are the best?

[alasdairmac]

I would not use a so-called protective filter in front of my lens. It will only detract from your picture quality. Your lens hood provides more that adequate protection for the front lens when it's fitted. A polarising filter should only be used when optically required.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pfitskie]

......... causes loss in Picture Quality? .........

 

 

Yes it will, but in such amount that no-one will notice it. 

[markphoto4u]

The benefits of a protective UV filter far out weigh the loss in image quality. If you don't believe me do the tests yourself. In the meantime get a filter on that expensive lens to keep it clean. Cleaning a lens over time -- no matter how careful you are -- will take its toll on your lens. Tiffen makes an excellent quality lens for a great price; so does Hoya. If you buy a CP just make sure it is a good quality brand. Again, it will be a simple test to take a shot with and without the CP. Many good landscape photographers use CPs to bring out the greens and reduce unwanted reflections. It is difficult to get a similar result in Photoshop or Lightroom. IMHO a UV should be on every lens. Also, a good CP, ND or two, and one or two split NDs are important tools for a landscape photographer.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Steve C]

I do,you cannot guarantee against accidents and a filter is cheaper and easier to replace than a front element.

I'd add B & W to the choice mixture.

[christer]

I do,you cannot guarantee against accidents and a filter is cheaper and easier to replace than a front element.

I'd add B & W to the choice mixture.

 

 

Modern lenses are not made the way lenses used to be made. Changing just the front element is often impossible because many lens elements are "glued" together.

 

You may find this interesting;

 

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/12/front-element-lens-protection-revisited/

.

[tinplater]

I  purchased a used Canon 300mm F4 lens with an included UV filter and was disappointed in image sharpness.  I took a series of tripod mounted images with and without the filter and was amazed at the clarity difference.  This was a quality B&W filter!  The loss of quality may be different for different lenses where the filter distance from lens glass may vary.  This is the only lens that I could demonstrate a lack of quality of image with a filter.  As for protection, the best protection for your lens, IMO, is a rubber collapsable hood.  It is like having a flexible shock absorber on the lens.

[LiveShots]

I have Zeiss T* UV filters on my lenses including my new 70-200 F2.8… I often take shots in dusty or wet locations, the lens hood does not protect the glass from either of these.

[Guest all8]

Does adding protective glass or Polarized filter in front of lens causes loss in Picture Quality? I just purchased 55mm f1.8 and 24-27 f2.8 gm, should I use lens protective filter or Polarized filter in front of them?  If yes, which are the best?

 

 

If you can afford an A7rII, and a GM lens, then you can afford a filter ... select an expensive one from Amazon, with a good rating. Get a polarizer too, why not. I personally have more filters than lenses ...

 

Now, with the filter fitted, and you find the images don't seem to have the correct Picture Quality, then remove the filter. Problem solved.

[Username]

Yes it will, but in such amount that no-one will notice it. 

    

Well .... no one who actually matters anyway. 

It is true that a few peepers can see a difference.  

They were put on earth accidentally. Ignore them.   

  

If you wanna give yourself an edge against some 

peepers inspecting your pixels, use top a quality 

UV filters and if you are NOT using an SLT type of 

Sony [A-mount body] avoid the  circular polarizers. 

They have more layers in their construction than a 

linear polarizer, which is the appropriate polarizer  

for any camera with no mirror in it [non-SLT Sony].

[Username]

I  purchased a used Canon 300mm F4 lens with an included UV

filter and was disappointed in image sharpness.  I took a series

of tripod mounted images with and without the filter and was

amazed at the clarity difference.  This was a quality B&W filter!

 ........

   

Faith in such a test demands that you bracket focus 

both with and without the filter. And, acoarst, never 

trust the AF nor the SLR mirror .... IOW, you always  

focus manually by magnified live view, which IS how

you performed your tests, right ?  

   

Sometimes a filter will cause a focus shift, but it can

still be fully sharp when properly focused. And with 

some lenses, just adding or removing the filter can 

slightly move the focusing mechanism even tho the 

glass of the filter is not by itself causing a focus shift.  

   

At any rate I'd get rid of that filter. It's not as good as 

you're believing its brand name quality ought to be. 

[JCC]

I shoot in very hostile environments(mosh pit), beer, sparks, glitter, fake blood, you name it.  

 

A filter has saved me from replacing a front element several times.

[tinplater]

"Faith in such a test demands that you bracket focus 

both with and without the filter. "

 

Disagree...the test was done the way I shoot.  Regardless of bracketing, the images with the filter were consistently less sharp than without.  That was enough for me.  99% of what I shoot is with autofocus and I have no interest in bracket exposing simply to accommodate a filter that degrades image quality.  The reason I did the comparison in the first place was because the first images I took were very disappointing and I thought I had a bad copy of the lens.  I did not, however, try a different filter to see if the problem was specific to that filter. 

[GeirJ]

A few years ago I accidentally scratched the front element of a lens when I put the lens cap on. The scratch does not affect IQ, but it reduced the second hand value of the lens to zero. Since then I use protection filters on all my lenses most of the time, especially the 24-70 which is on my camera most of the time. I noticed one strange thing about filters, though. I did som testing of the autofocus of the a-mount 70-400mm GII on my A7II with the LA-EA3 adapter and found that removing the UV filter improved autofocus.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Username]

`

`

   

IGNORE THIS

[Username]

 

`

   

.... and this. Double oops :-( 

[Username]

 

"Faith in such a test demands that you bracket focus 

both with and without the filter. "

 

Disagree...the test was done the way I shoot.  Regardless of bracketing, the

images with the filter were consistently less sharp than without.  That was

enough for me. .....................  I did not, however, try a different filter to see if

the problem was specific to that filter. 

 

    

Even those of us very in favor of filters acknowledge that many filters 

produce a detectable-by-critical-test IQ loss, yet find the small loss 

from excellent quality filters to be negligible. Clearly, you encountered 

a filter so "brutal" on your IQ that really critical testing wasn't required :-( 

  

Since you encountered a gross enuf loss that really careful test wasn't

even needed to declare the filter a major loser, SOMETHING is amiss 

here. Maybe the filter, maybe something else, but you seem to describe 

a degree of loss that even us "filter lovers" would find objectionable, for

sure !  In such sorry instances one simply rejects that filter in favor of a

decent one. IOW it's hardly any sort of generally applicable finding. 

   

Being a hard core supporter of filter use, I myself have occasionally had 

to junk a filter that came with a used lens. A filter CAN be obviously too 

lossy to keep. But that does not create a global rule on which to advise 

against filters in general.  

     

#####################################################   

   

On a completely different track ... lens hoods ? I have many hoods in use 

cuz I have many ancient lenses. The design and coating of my quite few 

modern lenses has, in my careful testing of my own PARTICULAR modern 

examples, caused me to park their bulky fancy dedicated lens hoods in my

junk drawer .... NOT cuz the hoods were badly or incorrectly designed but 

cuz the lenses were so well designed and coated that the hoods proved to 

be absolutely redundant and unnecessary. While this is rather welcome 

news, in that my gear is less bulky without the hoods attached, it's not like 

I'm comfortable leaving 77mm front glass completely unprotected. I could  

choose either the hood or a filter for protection. The hoods stay at home !

[tinplater]

@username:

Again, the distance between the two glass surfaces (front element and filter) may actually be a factor in image quality loss.  As for lens hoods, I keep them for when I resell the lens to make it complete (with box and caps too).   HOWEVER, all of my lenses have a rubber collapsable  hood in place because it provides significant protection against the bumps, scrapes, and other trauma that a lens may sustain in its travles.  Most of my lenses also have a filter in place too.  But not the 300mm IS Canon F4.  I just use the old, clumsy lens cap.

[K2Kevin]

I have seen reflections and other image issues using UV filters, some filters are better then others, but can produce lens flare when shooting into light.  Its good to have when shooting on beaches and other areas where the extra protection is warranted.  Blowing sand and salt spray can hurt that front element.

[trcns]

Okay, I loved every one's feed back. Thanks all. And based on comments, I will buy a filters. Now what should I buy? I have F55mm f1.8 Lens and I have 24-70 2.8 GM. Which should have UV filter and which have polarized. What kind Circular or Linear and finally which brand is best?

 

I am sorry, this is the first DSLR I ever bought so I don't know much about lenses. 

[Baiwei]

I wanted to say that breaking a filter is MUCH cheaper then breaking a front element of a lens... But you already said that you will use filters. 

 

Kinds of filters:

 

MC/Non MC - MC stands for Multi Coated. This coating reduces glass ability to reflect light so a multi coated filter of any kind is always better then a non coated as it gives less internal reflections which sometimes can be noticed. Additionally, MC filters are always made from better optical glass. So look for MC sign on your every filter.

 

Protection filter - just a clear glass. It just protects your lens from braking, from scratches, from dust, rain, snow, etc.

 

UV Filter - made from special glass with special coating which cuts UV specter of the light. This is done to achieve more natural colors on the pictures taken. BUT in most conditions (if you are not going to shoot on Everest) UV filter is just another name of protection filter, nothing more. Every camera has UV filter on it's sensor so in normal conditions you will not notice ant difference between UV filter and a simple protection filter. As long as they both high quality of course!

 

CPL (Polarizing filter). Made from special tourmaline-like glass, which allows passing through only to the waves of light that are polarized in one particular dimension. In real life all reflected light from clear surfaces are highly polarized (reflections from water, from while clouds, from glass, from cars, etc). CPL filter can be rotated to cut polarized light off. This allows taking pictures with more pronounced white clouds, with water without too strong reflections on it, e.t.c. This is not a must have filter, you can buy one to experiment with it to understand how it works.

 

ND - Neutral density. Just a dark glass, neutral dark. Just reduces light getting into your camera. Useful for taking pictures of waterfalls with the effect of flowing water. Usually used with a tripod. ND2 cuts half of light from camera, ND4 cuts 3/4 of light, e.t.c

 

ND2-400 Variable. These filters are actually made from 2 CPLs. You can rotate one of them and the filter gets darker and darker. Costs much more then usual NDs

 

Manufacturers.

 

The best ones are B+W and Rodenstock as far as I know. They are creepy expensive though... There are less expensive manufacturers that produce filters of great quality, like Kenko, Hoya, and even some Chinese manufacturers found on Ebay.

 

I hope that helped  

[Username]

 

Okay, I loved every one's feed back. Thanks all. And based on comments, I will

buy a filters. Now what should I buy? I have F55mm f1.8 Lens and I have 24-70

2.8 GM. Which should have UV filter and which have polarized. What kind

Circular or Linear and finally which brand is best?

 

I am sorry, this is the first DSLR I ever bought so I don't know much about lenses. 

    

OK. Sony does NOT sell any DSLRs. The current A-mount bodies are

SLTs and need circular polarizers. All other Sonys ILCs can use linear 

polarizers no problem. Actual DSLRs need circular polarizers so if you 

are also using any SLRs or SLTs you might as well standardize on only 

circular polarizers. I tend to use mainly Hoya, the HMC series but there 

are many other quality brands, and some brands have both a premium

and a "regular" line, at corresponding prices. 

  

Polarizers are expensive so consider any serious future plans to acquire 

additional lenses and if your intended new lenses use larger filters you'd 

do well to buy the larger size and use stepping rings on smaller lenses. 

[trcns]

Assuming that the best option for me is MC filter which prevents the reflection and protects the lens. I looked at Amazon and found two filters/Screen protectors. Both have the same price which one should I go with? Thinner is better or thicker. 

 

B+W 82mm XS-Pro Clear with Multi-Resistant Nano Coating Filter (007M) 

 

and

 

B+W 82mm Clear UV Haze with Multi-Resistant Coating (010M)

[Username]

I would get the UV, just cuz personally I prefer UV filters. 

Skylight filters are yukky pink, and I don't trust "clear" to 

be colorless, so at least with the UV I know where I'm at. 

  

It's really no matter anywho when shooting auto WB ... 

  

YMMV :-) 

[Baiwei]

Yep, take the UV one!