Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/02/25

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Filters and Lens Testing
From: firkin@netconnect.com.au
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 02:02:01 GMT
References: <B6BFCD87.9CF8%apbbeijing@yahoo.com>

apbbeijing writes:

> I use filters often and of many different types (with about 200 at last
> count) but I don't think any amount of lab testing of filter-caused image
> degradation is going to tell you what you need to know: that can only be
> found through practical shooting. Nevertheless I welcome any meaningful
> research on the matter.
> 
> Now if there is a logic for camera lenses to have a protective filter,
> surely there is an even greater one for enlarger lenses to have them: but
> you won't find any Uvs in front of my S-Biogon nor my Focotars!
> 
> Many pros regard UV filters as less than useless: like ERCs. Many others,
> myself included, keep UV filters on many lenses as a form of protection.
> This is mainly for the lenses that get thrown in the bag in the heat of
> shooting rather than for the most expensive or vulnerable optics: my
> ultra-wides, macros and long teles have no filters left on nor my MF and LF
> lenses but most of my most used 35mm lenses do. I use current B+W MRC UV
> filters for the most part and find them best in terms of flare resistance,
> cleaning ease and scratch resistance. I do however frequently remove them:
> when I am shooting a job where I expect to need a variety of colour or
> contrast correction filters I leave the Uvs at home since they otherwise get
> in the way. Shooting at night: leave them at home or live with annoying
> secondary images all over the picture. There are many other situations where
> I would hold the UV and many others where I would not worry but it is only
> through experience (i.e. Having screwed up) that I now know when to avoid
> them. My advice is get the experience or leave them at home. I spent far
> more on UV filters than all the lens repairs I have ever needed.
> 
> With Leica Ms the large number of obscure filter sizes and the fact that you
> cannot see the image until it is developed makes Uvs an expensive hazard
> IME. I find the worst cases of image degradation I experienced due to the
> old chrome rimmed Leitz  Uvs. Wouldn't recommend them for general use.
> 
> IME sharpness loss is undetectable but contrast tends to suffer with
> filters. I am often staggered by how many macho filter scoffers don't use a
> decent lens hood which is part of the original lens design: that is asking
> for problems IMHO. But if one gets extremist about these things then a $10k
> tripod and a concrete foundation is de rigeur and you can forget about sharp
> photos in Southern California and other earthquake prone locations: like
> Japan for example (but then we knew that ;^) )
> 
> Rs
> 
> Adrian
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Adrian Bradshaw
> Corporate and Editorial Photography
> Beijing, China
> tel/fax +86 10 6532 5112
> mobile +86 139 108 22292
> e-mail apbbeijing@yahoo.com
> OR adrianpeterbradshaw@compuserve.com
> 
> website:   http://www.apbphoto.com
>            http://www.liaisonintl.com/bradshaw.htm
>            http://www.liaisonintl.com/bradshaw_e.htm
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> 



FAN-BLOODY-TASTIC reply Adrian. This sums up the whole debate in my mind
and is a clear and reasoned approach.

How are you? I'm still looking for those Bradshaws on FOM2 ;-)

Cheers

Alastair

In reply to: Message from apbbeijing <apbbeijing@yahoo.com> (Re: [Leica] Filters and Lens Testing)