Buying lenses & filters for video and still camera...

Samuel Raj · August 12th, 2003, 09:54 PM

Steven,
Hope you aware, that Get a good quality or cheap Hoya filters first, to protect lens and to filter UV rays.

You can rely on Tiffen, B&W, Hoya, Raynox companies.

If its indoor, free from dusty environments, simple UV filter is enough, but if you need wide angle inside small room, to get all the surroundings, then u need wide angle.
Raynox HD-6600Pro is best and gives very very minimal distortion compared to others. But regarding the resolution, i am first time hearing about that.

May be Frank or Allan can help? Frank whats ur opinion?

Steven Blye · August 12th, 2003, 10:52 PM

Thanks for the reply Samual.

PriceJapan threw in the Panasonic filter pack with my purchase because I overpaid by $40 (the price dropped between Friday when I first contacted them and Monday when I paid). I should have paid for another pack for the 2nd camera at the time, so now I'll have to buy something here. As I'm doing stereo video, will UV filters from another maker show a difference between the pictures of two cameras being seen in stereo? And do you know exactly what UV filter and ND filter is sent from Panasonic?

Also, to reduce depth of field, is there a certain strength ND filter that is commonly used, or is it fitted to your liking?

Frank Granovski · August 13th, 2003, 12:50 AM

Hoya make different grades of filters. I believe they also make the slimmest of the slim. I have some regular Hoya filters. They are fine. For the money, Cokins are good---my buddy and I were taking stills earlier. He loves his Cokin filter adaptor. Only problem is that you can't fit a hood on it, so he uses a reflector. I believe Bryan, one of our members here, went with that ultra slim UV from Hoya for his cam. But now he has a "box" attached to his adaptor, so he's using the big drop-in filters now. (It's hard to keep up with what he buys.) ;)

Gints Klimanis · August 13th, 2003, 12:55 PM

> Well, I prefer Raynox 0.66x not the 0.5x, the 0.5x
>has too much distortion, while 0.66x is best of all in that regard,
>and still being zoomable to about 6x...

The zoom-through ability was key for me in a particularly dynamic situation. The Raynox gets quite soft during zoom-ins on my Sony VX-2000. After an outdoor shoot, the Canon WD-58H it has more perceptible barrel distortion than my Raynox 0.66x, both at full zoom out. I didn't think much of this until two viewers of the footage casually asked me if I was using a special lens. It's convenient to rationalize and accept distortions until the unintiated make such comments.

August 12th, 2003, 09:54 PM	#16
Samuel Raj Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 210	Steven, Hope you aware, that Get a good quality or cheap Hoya filters first, to protect lens and to filter UV rays. You can rely on Tiffen, B&W, Hoya, Raynox companies. If its indoor, free from dusty environments, simple UV filter is enough, but if you need wide angle inside small room, to get all the surroundings, then u need wide angle. Raynox HD-6600Pro is best and gives very very minimal distortion compared to others. But regarding the resolution, i am first time hearing about that. May be Frank or Allan can help? Frank whats ur opinion?

August 12th, 2003, 10:52 PM	#17
Steven Blye New Boot Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Long Island City, New York Posts: 19	Thanks for the reply Samual. PriceJapan threw in the Panasonic filter pack with my purchase because I overpaid by $40 (the price dropped between Friday when I first contacted them and Monday when I paid). I should have paid for another pack for the 2nd camera at the time, so now I'll have to buy something here. As I'm doing stereo video, will UV filters from another maker show a difference between the pictures of two cameras being seen in stereo? And do you know exactly what UV filter and ND filter is sent from Panasonic? Also, to reduce depth of field, is there a certain strength ND filter that is commonly used, or is it fitted to your liking?

August 13th, 2003, 12:50 AM	#18
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Hoya make different grades of filters. I believe they also make the slimmest of the slim. I have some regular Hoya filters. They are fine. For the money, Cokins are good---my buddy and I were taking stills earlier. He loves his Cokin filter adaptor. Only problem is that you can't fit a hood on it, so he uses a reflector. I believe Bryan, one of our members here, went with that ultra slim UV from Hoya for his cam. But now he has a "box" attached to his adaptor, so he's using the big drop-in filters now. (It's hard to keep up with what he buys.) ;)

August 13th, 2003, 12:55 PM	#19
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	> Well, I prefer Raynox 0.66x not the 0.5x, the 0.5x >has too much distortion, while 0.66x is best of all in that regard, >and still being zoomable to about 6x... The zoom-through ability was key for me in a particularly dynamic situation. The Raynox gets quite soft during zoom-ins on my Sony VX-2000. After an outdoor shoot, the Canon WD-58H it has more perceptible barrel distortion than my Raynox 0.66x, both at full zoom out. I didn't think much of this until two viewers of the footage casually asked me if I was using a special lens. It's convenient to rationalize and accept distortions until the unintiated make such comments.