Anyone use a protective lens filter? at DVinfo.net

Chad Hucal · November 24th, 2008, 12:55 AM

Just curious if anyone puts a clear 77mm protective filter on their EX1 to protect the front glass? Something like this?

Sony | 77mm Multi-Coated (MC) UV Protector Glass | VF-77MPAM

I'm thinking it's a good idea to protect the camera's lens like one would with their SLR. Is this a bad idea for any reason, in terms of image quality?

Thanks for input.

James Miller · November 24th, 2008, 01:54 AM

I have tried this and for events where things might hit the glass using a UV filter. I can't see any quality drop however lens flare and bright objects will bounce the light and cause a ring effect showing the outline of the filter. KR, James

Serena Steuart · November 24th, 2008, 02:00 AM

It is my practice to always have a filter in place and that is almost universally advised (filters are cheaper than lenses). Obviously any extra glass results in some loss, but I think it minimal with a good optical quality filter. Others may disagree. Certainly you can get problems with very long lenses and if you have full situation control (not run-n-gun) where damage is unlikely then you may well decide to work without such protection.

Vincent Oliver · November 24th, 2008, 03:14 AM

Any filter fitted will be close to the front lens element, no image quality loss will be visible. The advantage is that you will protect your expensive lens from water (rain)), dust, sand etc. and if you use a good quality UV/Haze filter then you will also benefit from clearer telephoto shots. Years agao I was photographing a ostrich and the bird pecked my zoom lens, cracking the UV filter, that could have been more expensive had I not had the filter in place.

Barry J. Anwender · November 24th, 2008, 08:07 AM

I use the Tiffen 77mm Digital HT Ultra Clear, B&H #TIDHTUC77

It just barely fits under the lens hood and works with no issues that I have seen so far. I take it off and replace it with the B&W 486 IR filter when I'm shooting indoors. Cheers!

Chad Hucal · November 24th, 2008, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry J. Anwender

I use the Tiffen 77mm Digital HT Ultra Clear, B&H #TIDHTUC77

It just barely fits under the lens hood and works with no issues that I have seen so far. I take it off and replace it with the B&W 486 IR filter when I'm shooting indoors. Cheers!

Why the difference with indoors? What is different about the other filter?
Thanks.

Barry J. Anwender · November 24th, 2008, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad Hucal

Why the difference with indoors? What is different about the other filter?
Thanks.

Chad, do a search for "Infrared contamination" on Sony EX camera's.

Ted OMalley · November 24th, 2008, 09:16 PM

I couldn't get that Tiffen filter to fit beneath my lens hood on my EX3

Barry J. Anwender · November 24th, 2008, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted OMalley

I couldn't get that Tiffen filter to fit beneath my lens hood on my EX3

Ted, I initially thought the same on my EX3. It takes a little fiddling to get the right spot and then the hood turns into place freely. It's a close fit. Surprising how the thought of paying extra for a good filter can motivate one to make sure you don't miss anything. Cheers!

Alex Raskin · November 24th, 2008, 10:36 PM

I learned to have B+W 486 filter on my EX1 lens all the time, indoors or outdoors.

Eliminates the dreaded infrared contamination, and doubles as a protective filter for the lens.

Warren Kawamoto · November 24th, 2008, 10:47 PM

I love shots shooting directly into the sun. For these shots, your lens must be immaculately clean. I found that the more glass elements I have in front of the sensor, the easier it is to see those dreaded dust spots and unwanted reflections. So I took off all the filters on all of my cameras and have been shooting like this for more than 20 years now.

Chris Leong · November 25th, 2008, 01:49 AM

I have a regular Tiffen 77mm UV filter that I put on whenever it looks like there's going to be something that may get on the lens. Otherwise not.

FWIW my lens hood, etc., fits fine with the filter installed. It's just the standard (not slim/skinny) UV filter, I've had it around since my stills days.
If I have to do any serious filtration I usually use Tiffen glass in a matte box, Just force of habit, plus I own the matte box and glass already.

Pet peeve:

As an editor, I have spent way more than my share of time electronically picking lint and dust specks off the front of wide angle HD shots with unclean elements. Even HDV shots are horrible. And the more dirty glass, the more risk of dust. And the higher my frustration (read hourly rate) goes up...

I'd say that if you were shooting outdoors or in the wet or wind, put one on. If the lens is going to get splashed, definitely put one on. In that case, we don't care that the lens has something on it as much.

But it's still jarring/annoying to me if the lens is dirty...

Kenny Cowburn · December 4th, 2008, 04:47 AM

I definately recommend using a filter, not only for protection purposes, but also improves colours, depending what you use...

I have a B&W F-PRO 77 010 UV - Haze 1x on, pretty much all the time, except when doing backlit stuff and then only in controlled situations, where I am absolutely certain there are going to be no nasty surprises.

While shooting the Home in 2006, I was up in a tree where the riders had to ride up a ramp, then onto the platform I was on, then down the other side.

Paul Bolton of england got a bit too close to me and his clutch lever hit me square in the lens, fortunately I had a UV filter on at the time(craaaaaaaaaack), so what could have cost me thousands of €´s, came down to 200€.
yes this was before the EX1 / 3´s time, but lesson learned, fortunately not the hard way.

Ted OMalley · December 4th, 2008, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenny Cowburn

I definately recommend using a filter, not only for protection purposes, but also improves colours, depending what you use...

I have a B&W F-PRO 77 010 UV - Haze 1x on, pretty much all the time, except when doing backlit stuff and then only in controlled situations, where I am absolutely certain there are going to be no nasty surprises.

While shooting the Home in 2006, I was up in a tree where the riders had to ride up a ramp, then onto the platform I was on, then down the other side.

Paul Bolton of england got a bit too close to me and his clutch lever hit me square in the lens, fortunately I had a UV filter on at the time(craaaaaaaaaack), so what could have cost me thousands of €´s, came down to 200€.
yes this was before the EX1 / 3´s time, but lesson learned, fortunately not the hard way.

Best pro-filter story ever! Nice job!

Ian Planchon · December 4th, 2008, 09:23 AM

does anyone know if they make one for the sony .8 wide eye? thats what I a most nervous about. when its not on, and I am using the matte box, I can use a clear filter. but not for the wide eye. and usually when you're using that, you are close to something that could potentially reach out and do some damage.

November 24th, 2008, 12:55 AM	#1
Chad Hucal Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 77	Anyone use a protective lens filter? Just curious if anyone puts a clear 77mm protective filter on their EX1 to protect the front glass? Something like this? Sony \| 77mm Multi-Coated (MC) UV Protector Glass \| VF-77MPAM I'm thinking it's a good idea to protect the camera's lens like one would with their SLR. Is this a bad idea for any reason, in terms of image quality? Thanks for input.

November 24th, 2008, 09:16 PM	#8
Ted OMalley Major Player Join Date: May 2006 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 596	I couldn't get that Tiffen filter to fit beneath my lens hood on my EX3 __________________ Sony EX3, Vegas 9.0 64bit, Windows 7(64), Core i7, 12GB, RAID1 & 0, HotSwap SATA, 30" LCD(2560x1600)-GTX285 & 24" LCD(1360x768)-7800GT

November 25th, 2008, 01:49 AM	#12
Chris Leong Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Los Angeles CA USA Posts: 507	I have a regular Tiffen 77mm UV filter that I put on whenever it looks like there's going to be something that may get on the lens. Otherwise not. FWIW my lens hood, etc., fits fine with the filter installed. It's just the standard (not slim/skinny) UV filter, I've had it around since my stills days. If I have to do any serious filtration I usually use Tiffen glass in a matte box, Just force of habit, plus I own the matte box and glass already. Pet peeve: As an editor, I have spent way more than my share of time electronically picking lint and dust specks off the front of wide angle HD shots with unclean elements. Even HDV shots are horrible. And the more dirty glass, the more risk of dust. And the higher my frustration (read hourly rate) goes up... I'd say that if you were shooting outdoors or in the wet or wind, put one on. If the lens is going to get splashed, definitely put one on. In that case, we don't care that the lens has something on it as much. But it's still jarring/annoying to me if the lens is dirty... __________________ "The content, not the container."

November 24th, 2008, 01:54 AM	#2
James Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Sussex, UK Posts: 317	I have tried this and for events where things might hit the glass using a UV filter. I can't see any quality drop however lens flare and bright objects will bounce the light and cause a ring effect showing the outline of the filter. KR, James

November 24th, 2008, 02:00 AM	#3
Serena Steuart Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Studio Alnitak, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Posts: 640 Images: 3	It is my practice to always have a filter in place and that is almost universally advised (filters are cheaper than lenses). Obviously any extra glass results in some loss, but I think it minimal with a good optical quality filter. Others may disagree. Certainly you can get problems with very long lenses and if you have full situation control (not run-n-gun) where damage is unlikely then you may well decide to work without such protection.

November 24th, 2008, 03:14 AM	#4
Vincent Oliver Trustee Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Chislehurst, London Posts: 1,724	Any filter fitted will be close to the front lens element, no image quality loss will be visible. The advantage is that you will protect your expensive lens from water (rain)), dust, sand etc. and if you use a good quality UV/Haze filter then you will also benefit from clearer telephoto shots. Years agao I was photographing a ostrich and the bird pecked my zoom lens, cracking the UV filter, that could have been more expensive had I not had the filter in place.

November 24th, 2008, 08:07 AM	#5
Barry J. Anwender Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Saskatchewan, Canada Posts: 382	I use the Tiffen 77mm Digital HT Ultra Clear, B&H #TIDHTUC77 It just barely fits under the lens hood and works with no issues that I have seen so far. I take it off and replace it with the B&W 486 IR filter when I'm shooting indoors. Cheers!

November 24th, 2008, 10:36 PM	#10
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	I learned to have B+W 486 filter on my EX1 lens all the time, indoors or outdoors. Eliminates the dreaded infrared contamination, and doubles as a protective filter for the lens.

November 24th, 2008, 10:47 PM	#11
Warren Kawamoto Trustee Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 1,435	I love shots shooting directly into the sun. For these shots, your lens must be immaculately clean. I found that the more glass elements I have in front of the sensor, the easier it is to see those dreaded dust spots and unwanted reflections. So I took off all the filters on all of my cameras and have been shooting like this for more than 20 years now.

December 4th, 2008, 04:47 AM	#13
Kenny Cowburn Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Oberaudorf Germany Posts: 66	I definately recommend using a filter, not only for protection purposes, but also improves colours, depending what you use... I have a B&W F-PRO 77 010 UV - Haze 1x on, pretty much all the time, except when doing backlit stuff and then only in controlled situations, where I am absolutely certain there are going to be no nasty surprises. While shooting the Home in 2006, I was up in a tree where the riders had to ride up a ramp, then onto the platform I was on, then down the other side. Paul Bolton of england got a bit too close to me and his clutch lever hit me square in the lens, fortunately I had a UV filter on at the time(craaaaaaaaaack), so what could have cost me thousands of €´s, came down to 200€. yes this was before the EX1 / 3´s time, but lesson learned, fortunately not the hard way.

December 4th, 2008, 09:23 AM	#15
Ian Planchon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: an Alaskan living in Des Moines, Iowa Posts: 513	does anyone know if they make one for the sony .8 wide eye? thats what I a most nervous about. when its not on, and I am using the matte box, I can use a clear filter. but not for the wide eye. and usually when you're using that, you are close to something that could potentially reach out and do some damage.