Which cam will get you the "smoldering babes"? :)

Josh Bass · November 10th, 2002, 01:11 PM

I've seen several opinions here that it's okay to have unprotected shooting. They say a UV filter is just another way to cause lens flares, and that the coatings on the lenses themselves are plenty strong.

Bryan Beasleigh · November 10th, 2002, 06:17 PM

I'd rather err on the side of caution.

Jeff Donald · November 10th, 2002, 06:45 PM

It's a personal comfort level. I don't use protective filters. If the manufacture thought it needed protection, they'd have put the filter there to begin with. However, some people feel more comfortable with an extra piece of glass up front. Certainly the front element can be damaged by dropping, etc. That's what I own insurance for. Now, if you don't own insurance and feel that your prone to damaging your equipment or can't afford the costly repair, out of your pocket. Then put a filter on it.

But if you need to get every ounce of performance out of the great Canon optics then forgo the filter unless you have a reason to put one on (color correction, polarizer, diffusion etc.)

Jeff

Robert Knecht Schmidt · November 10th, 2002, 07:29 PM

Well, I suppose when I'm shooting in familiar conditions, and don't mind the consequences of the risks, I don't need a filter. But I always keep a spare one in my kit just in case.

Josh Bass · November 11th, 2002, 12:18 AM

I agree Jeff. I want to keep one on there, as it makes me feel better, but I'm always paranoid about dust and spots and the like, that don't seem to show up nearly as much on the lens glass itself. Every single time I looked at that filter, it was filthy! And I just realized the one I'd been using was coloring my video a little.

Vinson Watson · November 18th, 2002, 01:11 AM

I always keep my filter on to protect from scratches and damage. The filter's cheap compared to the cam's lens.

-Vinson

Robert Knecht Schmidt · November 18th, 2002, 02:32 AM

I guess some of us don't appreciate double-entendre.

Derrick Begin · November 20th, 2002, 10:50 AM

What a hoot! 1300++ Look-sees at this thread...

Now, leaving the UV Filter on the camera is definate insurance on your investment.

However, I have notice lense flares using it and have taken it off at times to remove them from the shot.

Cheers!

Kelly Hoggard · December 9th, 2002, 02:22 PM

I can't believe the number of replies from this post simply by putting the words "smoldering babes" in the title. I guess this is our equivalent of XL1 porn. We fellas are so hard up!haha
Kelly

Robert Knecht Schmidt · December 9th, 2002, 05:59 PM

And with 1531 views as of 2002-12-09, this could be the most-viewed thread on the DVInfo.net Community.

Jeff Donald · December 9th, 2002, 07:40 PM

Far short, gentlemen. There is a post in the XL1 camera forum with almost 4500 views. It was also very active when the server crashed in July and hundreds (if not thousands) of views were lost. But please be advised Meta-Discussions will be deleted (posts, not threads). So keep up the good work but limit the discussions (as much as possible) to the topic at hand. Thanks.

Jeff

Dylan Couper · December 31st, 2002, 10:28 AM

I think THIS will safely answer the question of "Which camera gets you the smouldering babes" once and for all!

http://www.hirespics.de/update-2002-12-23/reef.html

I'm just wondering why I'm not getting gigs like this.

Thanks to fellow video professional Keith Loh for forwarding this informative web page to me.

Paul Sedillo · December 31st, 2002, 01:43 PM

Of course one of the picutres had a trusty XL1s in it! Glad to see they are being put to good use.

Tell Keith thanks for the quality link!

Jeff Donald · December 31st, 2002, 02:10 PM

Yah, both video cameras are XL1's and the still photographer is using a Canon also.

Jeff

Bryan Beasleigh · December 31st, 2002, 06:48 PM

Do you think they remembered to put tape in the cameras?

November 10th, 2002, 01:11 PM	#46
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	I've seen several opinions here that it's okay to have unprotected shooting. They say a UV filter is just another way to cause lens flares, and that the coatings on the lenses themselves are plenty strong. __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

November 10th, 2002, 07:29 PM	#49
Robert Knecht Schmidt Wrangler Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 1,933	Well, I suppose when I'm shooting in familiar conditions, and don't mind the consequences of the risks, I don't need a filter. But I always keep a spare one in my kit just in case. __________________ All the best, Robert K S Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

November 11th, 2002, 12:18 AM	#50
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	I agree Jeff. I want to keep one on there, as it makes me feel better, but I'm always paranoid about dust and spots and the like, that don't seem to show up nearly as much on the lens glass itself. Every single time I looked at that filter, it was filthy! And I just realized the one I'd been using was coloring my video a little. __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

November 18th, 2002, 02:32 AM	#52
Robert Knecht Schmidt Wrangler Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 1,933	I guess some of us don't appreciate double-entendre. __________________ All the best, Robert K S Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

November 20th, 2002, 10:50 AM	#53
Derrick Begin Major Player Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: New York Posts: 329	*** * 1300+ + VIEWINGS * *** What a hoot! 1300++ Look-sees at this thread... Now, leaving the UV Filter on the camera is definate insurance on your investment. However, I have notice lense flares using it and have taken it off at times to remove them from the shot. Cheers!

November 10th, 2002, 06:17 PM	#47
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	I'd rather err on the side of caution.

November 10th, 2002, 06:45 PM	#48
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	It's a personal comfort level. I don't use protective filters. If the manufacture thought it needed protection, they'd have put the filter there to begin with. However, some people feel more comfortable with an extra piece of glass up front. Certainly the front element can be damaged by dropping, etc. That's what I own insurance for. Now, if you don't own insurance and feel that your prone to damaging your equipment or can't afford the costly repair, out of your pocket. Then put a filter on it. But if you need to get every ounce of performance out of the great Canon optics then forgo the filter unless you have a reason to put one on (color correction, polarizer, diffusion etc.) Jeff

November 18th, 2002, 01:11 AM	#51
Vinson Watson Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 79	I always keep my filter on to protect from scratches and damage. The filter's cheap compared to the cam's lens. -Vinson

December 9th, 2002, 02:22 PM	#54
Kelly Hoggard Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 37	I can't believe the number of replies from this post simply by putting the words "smoldering babes" in the title. I guess this is our equivalent of XL1 porn. We fellas are so hard up!haha Kelly

December 9th, 2002, 05:59 PM	#55
Robert Knecht Schmidt Wrangler Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 1,933	And with 1531 views as of 2002-12-09, this could be the most-viewed thread on the DVInfo.net Community. __________________ All the best, Robert K S Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

December 9th, 2002, 07:40 PM	#56
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Far short, gentlemen. There is a post in the XL1 camera forum with almost 4500 views. It was also very active when the server crashed in July and hundreds (if not thousands) of views were lost. But please be advised Meta-Discussions will be deleted (posts, not threads). So keep up the good work but limit the discussions (as much as possible) to the topic at hand. Thanks. Jeff

December 31st, 2002, 10:28 AM	#57
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	I found the answer I think THIS will safely answer the question of "Which camera gets you the smouldering babes" once and for all! http://www.hirespics.de/update-2002-12-23/reef.html I'm just wondering why I'm not getting gigs like this. Thanks to fellow video professional Keith Loh for forwarding this informative web page to me.

December 31st, 2002, 01:43 PM	#58
Paul Sedillo Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 607	Of course one of the picutres had a trusty XL1s in it! Glad to see they are being put to good use. Tell Keith thanks for the quality link! __________________ Paul Sedillo Image::Studio http://www.image-studio.com Houston, Texas

December 31st, 2002, 02:10 PM	#59
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Yah, both video cameras are XL1's and the still photographer is using a Canon also. Jeff

December 31st, 2002, 06:48 PM	#60
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	Do you think they remembered to put tape in the cameras?