How many filters and which one do i leave on?

[nus123]

Hi,

I'm not new to photography but completely new to filters. I was hoping some of you guys could help me! I have a D800 with 24-70mm and i need to replace the UV filter as the one i have at the moment is a little grubby.

I am thinking of this.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/756191-REG/B_W_1066125_77mm_Ultraviolet_UV_MC.html

However i have 2 problems...

1) the rim look very slim. Will the lens cap be hard to put on....

2) with it being so thin. will i be able to add filters on top of this.


I am thinking of also buying a polalizer and ND. I appreciate the reasons for having these etc but i'm not totally understanding the practicalites. I primarily use my camera for general walk around holiday shooting. Does that mean when i want to take photo of water i have to screw the Polarizer on and then unscrew it once i'm done, or can i leave it on all the time and use it instead on a UV?:bonk:

cheers for any help!

 

[Digifrog]

You can of course leave the polarizer on at all times but it will obviously block 2 stops of light entering the lens. Not a problem if the light is good but when the light dims or it is night then either a very steady hand or tripod would be required. That, or then take the polarizer off of course.

I wouldn't know about the UV filter as I don't use one but I would imagine that you will still be able to attach the lens cap as normal. However, if it is a slim filter it may not have a thread meaning the inability to attach another filter.

I use the Lee filter system (graduated filters). Using this system allows me to leave the adaptor ring attached to the lens and then place the Lee cap on top.

Personally, if I'm on walkabout I'd have no filters on my 24-70. If I were you I'd give Robert White Photographic or WEX a call, they'd be able to advise you on specifics.

Hope this helps somewhat.

 

[Photodiva]

Hi. Firstly, you do not NEED a UV filter. Its OK to have one, but not essential. I had them but now don't use them. ALWAYS use the lens hood to protect the lens.
A slim filter is needed with wide lenses to avoid it intruding into the photo. Slim filter rings shouldn't have any issues with lens caps.
Not a good idea to stack filters, you will degrade the image quality.
Polarisers are useful in certain conditions. I have one, hardly use it. But if I need it I will swap filters, or just put it on and twiddle it to get the right effect.. A fiddle, but worth it. Polarisers have the effect of reducing the amount of light on the sensor, so you have to compensate with longer exposure times. OK in bright light, but not all the time.

An ND is useful for certain effects. Personally I prefer a ND Grad for landscape shots. I don't usually bother with the holders, just hold the square filter in front of the lens. If you want to take milky water shots at the beach or at waterfalls you are going to need fairly dark ND, so will likely need a tripod at the very least. This photography lark gets a drain on the bank balance ...

 

[nus123]

Hi. Firstly, you do not NEED a UV filter. Its OK to have one, but not essential. I had them but now don't use them. ALWAYS use the lens hood to protect the lens.
A slim filter is needed with wide lenses to avoid it intruding into the photo. Slim filter rings shouldn't have any issues with lens caps.
Not a good idea to stack filters, you will degrade the image quality.
Polarisers are useful in certain conditions. I have one, hardly use it. But if I need it I will swap filters, or just put it on and twiddle it to get the right effect.. A fiddle, but worth it. Polarisers have the effect of reducing the amount of light on the sensor, so you have to compensate with longer exposure times. OK in bright light, but not all the time.

An ND is useful for certain effects. Personally I prefer a ND Grad for landscape shots. I don't usually bother with the holders, just hold the square filter in front of the lens. If you want to take milky water shots at the beach or at waterfalls you are going to need fairly dark ND, so will likely need a tripod at the very least. This photography lark gets a drain on the bank balance ...

thanks for your help. so the only reason i think i need a UV filter is from past experience those UV filters have come in very useful on odd bangs while out.

So the best way to go is UV and then carry around some square ND /polarisers that i could hold /attach to the lens? I guess the advantage of this is i would be able to use them other other lenses too that may not be 77mm.

 

[Dale_tem]

My biggest lens is 77mm so I only have 77mm filters and then use step up rings to step up from 52mm, 58mm, 72mm etc.

 

[Nawty]

If I'd just forked out on a D800 and 24-70 I wouldn't be putting a UV filter anywhere near it.

Why spend all that money on the best kit you can buy and then put something that degrades IQ on the front and leave it there?

Sure there are some situations were a bit of protection for the front element are useful but those are few and far between for me so I can just put it on as required. Actually I can't as I don't and won't have one.

NDs, Grads, Polarisers are different, yes they alse degrade the IQ a little but the actually give you something in return so are well worth using.

 

[Photodiva]

thanks for your help. so the only reason i think i need a UV filter is from past experience those UV filters have come in very useful on odd bangs while out.

So the best way to go is UV and then carry around some square ND /polarisers that i could hold /attach to the lens? I guess the advantage of this is i would be able to use them other other lenses too that may not be 77mm.

You'd probably need a polariser or ND to fit the lens. Most of mine are 77mm, but I've probably got one or two for my older lenses in different dia. The ND Grad can be bought as a holder that screws on like a filter and then you slot in the grads as you need them. Can mount up in ££ so be economic with em!

 

[nus123]

If I'd just forked out on a D800 and 24-70 I wouldn't be putting a UV filter anywhere near it.

Why spend all that money on the best kit you can buy and then put something that degrades IQ on the front and leave it there?

Sure there are some situations were a bit of protection for the front element are useful but those are few and far between for me so I can just put it on as required. Actually I can't as I don't and won't have one.

NDs, Grads, Polarisers are different, yes they alse degrade the IQ a little but the actually give you something in return so are well worth using.

Really?? Having forked out nearly 1.3k on a lens surely you would want sometime to protect the front?? i guess it depends on the type of photography but i mainly do street/outdoor and event so bumps will be inevitable. Having something there just gives me peace of mind.

 

[Pookeyhead]

Really?? Having forked out nearly 1.3k on a lens surely you would want sometime to protect the front??

Having forked out £1300 for a lens, I'd have thought you'd want the best optical quality frm it?

Filters add flare, lower contrast, and generally make things worse in very many lighting circumstances.

You want to protect your lens? Keep your lens cap on when not shooting. When walking through crowds etc, just angle the lens down if it's a big lens, or keep your hand over it if it's a smaller lens. The only time I'd use on if if I knew I'd be a very hostile environment.. dust, sand etc.

 

[Nawty]

Having forked out £1300 for a lens, I'd have thought you'd want the best optical quality frm it?

Filters add flare, lower contrast, and generally make things worse in very many lighting circumstances.

You want to protect your lens? Keep your lens cap on when not shooting.

Exactly.

There have been a million and one threads about this so I suggest you search but the best protection there is is the lens hood, so use that and hey, it can even improve the IQ when shooting in sunlight.

Filters on the other hand can only ever degrade the IQ.

Lenses are super tough, way tougher than filters and would survive many bumps that a filter wouldn't and would you want to smash a filter against the lens?

Anyway, do a search and make up your own mind...

 

[badboy1984]

I use to put UV filters on all my lens but i take them off and don't use them now. First i find the image quality is better without the filter and second the uv filter can sometimes cause more problem under certain situations. So therefore i don't use anymore.

Only time when i do use the uv filter as protection is when i know i will shoot under extreme condition which involve sand, mud, very dirty environment etc.

 

[nus123]

Exactly.

There have been a million and one threads about this so I suggest you search but the best protection there is is the lens hood, so use that and hey, it can even improve the IQ when shooting in sunlight.

Filters on the other hand can only ever degrade the IQ.

Lenses are super tough, way tougher than filters and would survive many bumps that a filter wouldn't and would you want to smash a filter against the lens?

Anyway, do a search and make up your own mind...

thanks! the questions regarding the protection was not really the intent of this thread. I am fully aware that many pros dont use filters. Thanks for the advice and sorry for the tangent! I think i might invest in a decent polariser instead of UV and go filter free!