I almost sold my Nikon Z 100-400 because the images were soft. It turns out it was the result of the UV filter I bought to protect the lens' front element. I now test my front element protectors against a sharpness chart to look for loss of sharpness and contrast. Or I just don't use them, I removed them from most of my lenses.
I would never use protection filters Ray. They obviously make birds disappear based on your sample pictures 😂. Serioulsy though, I have taken pictures through windows and nobody has noticed! I have used the Hoya Pro 1 digitals and have a few on some lenses. Great filters. I can't tell any difference with my eys looking through Zeiss glasses. What did we do before we could pontificate on the internet? Oh ya, now I remember, we went outside and did things like taking pictures!
😆 Take pictures? That's work. Not more than making videos, mind you. The question I have though: those windows; were they made by AGC, or were they cheap windows?
Pretty easy to buy cheap filters (by accident) and slap them on S line glass. I have removed a few of them especially the cheap ones I bought for my 28-75 and 24-200. That len(s) is non S line and needs all the help it can get for sharp pictures. For my 400 4.5 and 180-600 I got the Nikon 95mm NC's. I haven't notice any degradation in quality. The 800PF does not have a front filter option so I trust my lens hood to protect the front glass. I think it is whatever get's you outside and taking pictures, or video...
I purchased Promaster UV filters when I purchased my camera & lenses (what the camera shop sold only) all but for the Nikon F- Mount 14-24mm lens. Used them for about a year & then took them off. I keep them in my bag & if going on the beach in real windy conditions or possible saltwater spray, I would put one on & where a magnetic filter set would come in handy. Looking at the baby cradle reminds me how I babied my equipment the first four or so years I owned it & wish I still was as anal now as I was then. Also reminds me that I need to bring my camera bag out of my truck where it has been for 4 months & clean everything including the bag. Also think about getting A dry cabinet like the one you showed for my camera gear. Wondering if it would be more harmful to be moving the gear from such a dry atmosphere to a humid climate than rather just in the same climate all the time. Six years now living within 1 mile of a saltwater climate with no problems so far. (knock on wood) I do have central air & heat which produces very low humidity that might contribute to having no problems from the climate I live in. Thanks for the vid.
To be honest, I could be even more fastidious with my gear. Still, I do try to baby it as much as possible. Having said that, it's true that gear can be replaced but a missed shot can't (unless we're talking reproducible studio shots).
Very good, thank you. I added a B&W 010 112mm filter to my Canon RF 100-300mm f2.8 the day I received it as I have done to all of my previous lenses. It was $400 Australian, the lens was $14,000 Australian. I will admit though, I've shown little respect for my lenses in the rain. I've covered sports in very heavy rain many times and often by the sea in high winds. My luck can't last forever, so I've recently brought a couple of lens coats.
The B+W filters are good but I think the Hoyas edge them by just a wee bit, though I still use B+W on a number of my lenses. Ah, yes, I should have mentioned lens coats, so thanks for mentioning. Admittedly, I haven't renewed mine since I switched from F- to Z-mount. But I recommend them, as well as rain covers, mentioned in the linked shooting in the rain video. ruclips.net/video/yUqR2iDKG9Y/видео.html
Are you against Lens Pens? They have some kind of charcoal chamois cleaning pad attachment that's said to work well to clean glass; however, not sure if they're safe long-term for the lens coating or if they can potentially scratch the lenses. There's a Nikon branded one too. Personally never tried them but curious.
Darn, I forgot to include that option (I even had a purchase link prepared😀) TBH I haven't used one personally, but they do come recommended. As you say, even Nikon puts their name on them.
I’ve been sold on the idea of keeping a sacrificial (but not inexpensive) filter on top on my lens ever since I picked up a camera that would accept a filter. I’ve always bought B+W 010’s but recognize that I may be using the wine standard of more expensive must be better. We need more trusted reviews of filter (all types) quality by brand - and model, since many brands offer multiple qualities.
Yes, B+W were the standard for decades and are still a good choice. I bought them with every lens from the film days forward. I'd say filters have improved in lock-step with lenses and especially coatings. Agree that tests are informative if done in good faith rather than to serve confirmation bias.
I normally use a filter and lens hood on my walk around glass. I have broken filters and the glass was okay. For low light photography, I remove the filter but leave the lens hood on. I have found that the filters that I own, will cause reflections and ghosts in the low light images. I do not like to clean the front element of my glass, but at the same time, I will clean the filter very often. Another great video. I think that I recognize some of your Victoria shots (the ones with the cell phone tower), were they facing west?
Hi David. I'd be interested to know what filters cause low light ghosting -- not something I've run into in extensive testing in backlit situations. As I said in the video, lenses with "lesser" coatings can actually benefit from quality filters. Those test shots were not from Victoria (50 km away, facing southeast).
@@RaymondParkerPhoto I have noticed this with most, if not all filters, so I just remove the filter. The filter is never the quality of the lens. The light reflects of the back glass surface onto the front glass surface and then through the lens. The easy solution is just to remove the filter, but leave the lens hood on. I think that this is the solution that Ricci suggests.
I have UV or clear filters for almost all of my lenses. B+W brand. They rarely leave their case - BUT I like having them handy if I'm out in rough weather or other harsh environmental conditions (sand, dust). Other filters include Polar Pro CP (cars, glass, water), ND (long shutter) or variable ND (video) when needed, but they're not in the protection category of course. But full-time use indoors or outdoors - IMO absolutely unnecessary - with the caveat here that it doesn't bother me whatsoever how others choose to roll, all good 🙂 The coatings on modern lenses are SO much tougher than most people think. Some better than others, but the lenses we pay more for are actually very difficult to damage (assuming common sense habits). And no matter how good a filter is - it's still an inferior piece of glass in front of far superior lens elements. Additionally / ironically, regarding impact damage, it's very common that a filter and/or filter ring is the culprit of damage that otherwise would have been at least minimized, or even avoided. I don't like that downside. But overall, I don't think we're very far off on opinions here. I'll add, the ONLY time I shoot without a lens hood is if I'm using one of the CP or ND filters mentioned above, which I have a big rubber lens cap for when they're in use. Good topic 👍🏻
With the caveat, likewise, that it doesn't bother me either how people roll, I'm obviously of the opinion that there's a real benefit to protection filters, as outlined in this video. While modern coatings are the best ever, they're not immune to damage (as noted in the video). Also noted is the quality of modern filters; the best are made from the same glass as lenses, often by the same manufacturers (e.g. Schott, AGC). I just don't buy the story of common damage from filters themselves, except, as I also mentioned, in "tests" designed to verify existing biases.
@@RaymondParkerPhoto The tests I've seen were fair / clear - not sure how else one would measure equal impact in a controlled way. That aside, coincidentally I also have a family member's 18-200 here with a shattered UV that now refuses to be removed. But hey to be fair too - no lens hood was on at the time (the bigger error of course).
Outside the studio i'd rather scrub a UV filter than a front element. Buy glass filters not plastic. A lens hood gives great protection too and a bonus - less flare ... 🦘
Do you "baby" your lenses and are you pro or con protection filters? Let us know the hows and whys of your maintenance routine.
I baby all of my camera equipment, I am about the same vintage as you and old habits are hard to break. Protection filters are a must for daytime use.
I almost sold my Nikon Z 100-400 because the images were soft. It turns out it was the result of the UV filter I bought to protect the lens' front element. I now test my front element protectors against a sharpness chart to look for loss of sharpness and contrast. Or I just don't use them, I removed them from most of my lenses.
Great video Ray !!
Thanks Matt!
Just bought one of the VSGO blowers you show in your video. What a fantastic product!!
Thank you
Glad you like it!
I would never use protection filters Ray. They obviously make birds disappear based on your sample pictures 😂. Serioulsy though, I have taken pictures through windows and nobody has noticed! I have used the Hoya Pro 1 digitals and have a few on some lenses. Great filters. I can't tell any difference with my eys looking through Zeiss glasses. What did we do before we could pontificate on the internet? Oh ya, now I remember, we went outside and did things like taking pictures!
😆 Take pictures? That's work. Not more than making videos, mind you. The question I have though: those windows; were they made by AGC, or were they cheap windows?
Pretty easy to buy cheap filters (by accident) and slap them on S line glass. I have removed a few of them especially the cheap ones I bought for my 28-75 and 24-200. That len(s) is non S line and needs all the help it can get for sharp pictures. For my 400 4.5 and 180-600 I got the Nikon 95mm NC's. I haven't notice any degradation in quality. The 800PF does not have a front filter option so I trust my lens hood to protect the front glass. I think it is whatever get's you outside and taking pictures, or video...
You are a treasure Ray 👍
☺️
I purchased Promaster UV filters when I purchased my camera & lenses (what the camera shop sold only) all but for the Nikon F- Mount 14-24mm lens. Used them for about a year & then took them off. I keep them in my bag & if going on the beach in real windy conditions or possible saltwater spray, I would put one on & where a magnetic filter set would come in handy. Looking at the baby cradle reminds me how I babied my equipment the first four or so years I owned it & wish I still was as anal now as I was then. Also reminds me that I need to bring my camera bag out of my truck where it has been for 4 months & clean everything including the bag. Also think about getting A dry cabinet like the one you showed for my camera gear. Wondering if it would be more harmful to be moving the gear from such a dry atmosphere to a humid climate than rather just in the same climate all the time. Six years now living within 1 mile of a saltwater climate with no problems so far. (knock on wood) I do have central air & heat which produces very low humidity that might contribute to having no problems from the climate I live in. Thanks for the vid.
To be honest, I could be even more fastidious with my gear. Still, I do try to baby it as much as possible. Having said that, it's true that gear can be replaced but a missed shot can't (unless we're talking reproducible studio shots).
Thanks for reminding me about fungus as I live in a tropical climate! My Pelican case will stay closed next to my AC! 😃
Very good, thank you.
I added a B&W 010 112mm filter to my Canon RF 100-300mm f2.8 the day I received it as I have done to all of my previous lenses. It was $400 Australian, the lens was $14,000 Australian.
I will admit though, I've shown little respect for my lenses in the rain. I've covered sports in very heavy rain many times and often by the sea in high winds. My luck can't last forever, so I've recently brought a couple of lens coats.
The B+W filters are good but I think the Hoyas edge them by just a wee bit, though I still use B+W on a number of my lenses.
Ah, yes, I should have mentioned lens coats, so thanks for mentioning. Admittedly, I haven't renewed mine since I switched from F- to Z-mount. But I recommend them, as well as rain covers, mentioned in the linked shooting in the rain video. ruclips.net/video/yUqR2iDKG9Y/видео.html
Are you against Lens Pens? They have some kind of charcoal chamois cleaning pad attachment that's said to work well to clean glass; however, not sure if they're safe long-term for the lens coating or if they can potentially scratch the lenses. There's a Nikon branded one too. Personally never tried them but curious.
Darn, I forgot to include that option (I even had a purchase link prepared😀) TBH I haven't used one personally, but they do come recommended. As you say, even Nikon puts their name on them.
I’ve been sold on the idea of keeping a sacrificial (but not inexpensive) filter on top on my lens ever since I picked up a camera that would accept a filter. I’ve always bought B+W 010’s but recognize that I may be using the wine standard of more expensive must be better. We need more trusted reviews of filter (all types) quality by brand - and model, since many brands offer multiple qualities.
Yes, B+W were the standard for decades and are still a good choice. I bought them with every lens from the film days forward. I'd say filters have improved in lock-step with lenses and especially coatings. Agree that tests are informative if done in good faith rather than to serve confirmation bias.
I normally use a filter and lens hood on my walk around glass. I have broken filters and the glass was okay. For low light photography, I remove the filter but leave the lens hood on. I have found that the filters that I own, will cause reflections and ghosts in the low light images. I do not like to clean the front element of my glass, but at the same time, I will clean the filter very often.
Another great video. I think that I recognize some of your Victoria shots (the ones with the cell phone tower), were they facing west?
Hi David. I'd be interested to know what filters cause low light ghosting -- not something I've run into in extensive testing in backlit situations. As I said in the video, lenses with "lesser" coatings can actually benefit from quality filters.
Those test shots were not from Victoria (50 km away, facing southeast).
@@RaymondParkerPhoto I have noticed this with most, if not all filters, so I just remove the filter. The filter is never the quality of the lens. The light reflects of the back glass surface onto the front glass surface and then through the lens. The easy solution is just to remove the filter, but leave the lens hood on. I think that this is the solution that Ricci suggests.
Try Marumi filters and compare it to Hoya, from reviews they’re extremely high quality. The only downside is they’re hard to find outside of Japan.
Sounds interesting. I did hear about them, I think. Wasn't there a debate about whether they were made by Nikon?
I have UV or clear filters for almost all of my lenses. B+W brand. They rarely leave their case - BUT I like having them handy if I'm out in rough weather or other harsh environmental conditions (sand, dust). Other filters include Polar Pro CP (cars, glass, water), ND (long shutter) or variable ND (video) when needed, but they're not in the protection category of course.
But full-time use indoors or outdoors - IMO absolutely unnecessary - with the caveat here that it doesn't bother me whatsoever how others choose to roll, all good 🙂 The coatings on modern lenses are SO much tougher than most people think. Some better than others, but the lenses we pay more for are actually very difficult to damage (assuming common sense habits). And no matter how good a filter is - it's still an inferior piece of glass in front of far superior lens elements. Additionally / ironically, regarding impact damage, it's very common that a filter and/or filter ring is the culprit of damage that otherwise would have been at least minimized, or even avoided. I don't like that downside.
But overall, I don't think we're very far off on opinions here. I'll add, the ONLY time I shoot without a lens hood is if I'm using one of the CP or ND filters mentioned above, which I have a big rubber lens cap for when they're in use. Good topic 👍🏻
With the caveat, likewise, that it doesn't bother me either how people roll, I'm obviously of the opinion that there's a real benefit to protection filters, as outlined in this video.
While modern coatings are the best ever, they're not immune to damage (as noted in the video). Also noted is the quality of modern filters; the best are made from the same glass as lenses, often by the same manufacturers (e.g. Schott, AGC).
I just don't buy the story of common damage from filters themselves, except, as I also mentioned, in "tests" designed to verify existing biases.
@@RaymondParkerPhoto The tests I've seen were fair / clear - not sure how else one would measure equal impact in a controlled way. That aside, coincidentally I also have a family member's 18-200 here with a shattered UV that now refuses to be removed. But hey to be fair too - no lens hood was on at the time (the bigger error of course).
Outside the studio i'd rather scrub a UV filter than a front element.
Buy glass filters not plastic.
A lens hood gives great protection too and a bonus - less flare ... 🦘
Yep, that's what hoods are made for.