[LRFlex] Re: UV Filters
- From: Douglas Herr <telyt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 14:39:31 -0700 (PDT)
Title: UV Filters
> I would be interested in the opinions of this group generally about UV/skylight/protective filters.
Shooting into the sun or other bright light sources can cause ghosting with or without a filter, but it's more likely with a filter because of the two additional air/glass surfaces. Since one of the things I value about my lenses is their flare resistance and resultant color saturation I'd rather take my chances without a protective surface in order to get the full effect of the flare resistance I paid dearly for.
Given that I've gone without UV/skylight/protective filters for 25 years and have yet to damage a lens element it seems like a reasonable tradeoff. I also have all-risk insurance on my equipment just in case.
Doug Herr
Birdman of Sacramento
http://www.wildlightphoto.com
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
- » [LRFlex] UV Filters
- » [LRFlex] Re: UV Filters
- » [LRFlex] Re: UV Filters
- » [LRFlex] Re: UV Filters
- » [LRFlex] Re: UV Filters
- » [LRFlex] Re: UV Filters
- » [LRFlex] Re: UV Filters
> I would be interested in the opinions of this group generally about UV/skylight/protective filters.
Shooting into the sun or other bright light sources can cause ghosting with or without a filter, but it's more likely with a filter because of the two additional air/glass surfaces. Since one of the things I value about my lenses is their flare resistance and resultant color saturation I'd rather take my chances without a protective surface in order to get the full effect of the flare resistance I paid dearly for.
Given that I've gone without UV/skylight/protective filters for 25 years and have yet to damage a lens element it seems like a reasonable tradeoff. I also have all-risk insurance on my equipment just in case.