Overclockers UK Forums Click here for more details
Free Shipping for Loyal Forum Members - CLICK HERE

Go Back   Overclockers UK Forums > Audio Visual > Photography & Video

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 8th Feb 2011, 21:39   #1
sharingan_sasuk
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,057
Which UV filter size for Nikon D3100?

Hey guys, just picked up my first ever Digital SLR from Jessops, a Nikon D3100! I've already ordered some Sandisk Ultra SDHC cards and I'll get a bag soon, probably a Lowepro one? The AW 160 or something. I'm going to Vietnam for 3 months in a few weeks so I wanted to be prepared.

However one thing I'm still not sure about is the UV filter size. Some Google results say 58mm, others say 52mm. Jessops sell a bundle with the camera that includes a 52mm one, so I assume that's the correct size? There's a B+W one for about 12 I'm looking at, but any suggestions are more than welcome. I'm getting it mainly for the protection, but it should of course make no different to my pictures as well!
sharingan_sasuk is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 8th Feb 2011, 21:40   #2
manjuice
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,193
Filter size depends on the lens you have.

manjuice is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 8th Feb 2011, 21:42   #3
Talon
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: Hull
Posts: 1,496
As above, post the lens and someone will fill you in.

Xbox | PSN = Progeni
Flickr
Talon is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 8th Feb 2011, 21:43   #4
sharingan_sasuk
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,057
On the lens, it says Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G VR.
sharingan_sasuk is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 8th Feb 2011, 21:45   #5
Talon
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: Hull
Posts: 1,496
52mm I think but I don't use my kit lens so I have never bought one for it.

If you have a look at the end of the lens you'll see a screw thread, thats the filter attachment. It the diameter of that that governs the filter size you need to buy.

Xbox | PSN = Progeni
Flickr
Talon is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 8th Feb 2011, 22:11   #6
prUnE
Gangster
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Location: Leeds/Durham
Posts: 365
If you look on the side of the lens there should be a couple of digits after this symbol ∅; that's your lens diameter/filter size.

prUnE is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 8th Feb 2011, 22:14   #7
sharingan_sasuk
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,057
Ah yes of course. Dunno how I failed to see that lol. Many thanks!
sharingan_sasuk is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 9th Feb 2011, 07:31   #8
Snapshot
Mobster
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 3,533
If you want it to make no difference to your pics then you need to spend a lot more than 12. I use the Hoya Pro1 Digital range, either UV or just
'protector'. Not cheap, especially the larger sizes, but they have good multi-coating so don't take much away from the results. A cheap single-coated filter is worse than useless.

Snapshot is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 9th Feb 2011, 07:51   #9
D.P.
Capodecina
 
D.P.'s Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 22,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharingan_sasuk View Post
On the lens, it says Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G VR.
I wouldn't put a UV filter on this lens.

There is a time and a place for a UV filter but the kit lens is not a lens that deserves a UV filter.

With a UV filter you need to buy a good branded filter with multi coating and a solid frame that what jump threads on the lens.
The other thing is it is pointless gettign a UV filter for filtering UV as the sensor just aren't sensitive to UV.

So I pressume you want a UV filter for protection, if yo then look at buying a protection filter.
Last edited by D.P.; 9th Feb 2011 at 07:56.
D.P. is online now   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 9th Feb 2011, 11:10   #10
AtticusFinch
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: London
Posts: 1,537
Or just always leave the hood on and you don't need a filter for protection at all - the age debate.
AtticusFinch is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2011, 10:50   #11
Tooks
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 2,039
As above, I really wouldn't bother with a filter for protection at all.

A decent one that won't adversely effect the image quality will probably cost half of what the lens does...

Nikon D700, Nikon D300, Nikon D7000, Nikon 50mm f1.8, Nikon 24-70 f2.8,
Nikon 70-200 f2.8, Nikon 300 f2.8, 1.4x TCII, 2.0x TCIII, 2 x Nissin Di866
Tooks is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2011, 11:16   #12
manjuice
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tooks View Post
As above, I really wouldn't bother with a filter for protection at all.

A decent one that won't adversely effect the image quality will probably cost half of what the lens does...
I doubt you would be able to tell the difference in a picture with a 12 filter on and off.

manjuice is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2011, 11:34   #13
Tooks
Wise Guy
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 2,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by tchan_4 View Post
I doubt you would be able to tell the difference in a picture with a 12 filter on and off.
Maybe, maybe not.

The photographer is the biggest variable anyway.

You have your views, I have mine, but experience and a lot of money wasted on cheap filters tells me that they rarely do anything to enhance image quality, and more often than not make it worse, and that's before you get in to colour casts...

Nikon D700, Nikon D300, Nikon D7000, Nikon 50mm f1.8, Nikon 24-70 f2.8,
Nikon 70-200 f2.8, Nikon 300 f2.8, 1.4x TCII, 2.0x TCIII, 2 x Nissin Di866
Tooks is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2011, 12:42   #14
D.P.
Capodecina
 
D.P.'s Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 22,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by tchan_4 View Post
I doubt you would be able to tell the difference in a picture with a 12 filter on and off.
On the contrary, it is very easy (depending on the lighting).
D.P. is online now   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 11th Feb 2011, 00:49   #15
mhk1058
Gangster
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 128
I've never seen a definitive answer to the need for a UV filter with a digital camera. Certainly needed for film but I'm not so sure about digital and I have never bothered, although they certainly make cleaning easier, particularly if the front element is recessed a lot.

mhk1058 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 11th Feb 2011, 08:09   #16
D.P.
Capodecina
 
D.P.'s Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 22,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhk1058 View Post
I've never seen a definitive answer to the need for a UV filter with a digital camera. Certainly needed for film but I'm not so sure about digital and I have never bothered, although they certainly make cleaning easier, particularly if the front element is recessed a lot.
Digital sensors have no issue with UV unlike film, so the UV coating of a UV filter has no purpose these days. They are used only for protection, so under these circumstances you need a high quality filter to provide protection and you want to avoid low quality filters which visually reduce the image quality.

I use no filters on cheap lenses (< 500) and use high quality B+W filters on my expensive lenses for casual shooting, but remove them for professional photography.

However, a CPL is on my walk about lenses most of the time anyway.
D.P. is online now   View trust for Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:09.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Overclockers UK (Ocuk Ltd)