Do I really need filters???
- Thread starter G-Dubs
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Sep 2006
- Posts
- 4,863
- Location
- Gloucestershire
Don't bother with a UV filter, waste of money.
A polarizing filter is a very handy bit of kit, but not essential. It depends on what you want to photography mostly.
A polarizing filter is a very handy bit of kit, but not essential. It depends on what you want to photography mostly.
UV: Use it for protection
Polarisers: Consider them once you get onto lenses which don't rotate at the front when focussing, for the moment not that useful
ND: Nigh on essential for waterscapes
ND Grads: Same again.
I'd get a couple of UV filters just to protect the front elements of your lenses, much cheaper to replace that than a lens.
Polarisers: Consider them once you get onto lenses which don't rotate at the front when focussing, for the moment not that useful
ND: Nigh on essential for waterscapes
ND Grads: Same again.
I'd get a couple of UV filters just to protect the front elements of your lenses, much cheaper to replace that than a lens.
This.
UV filters aren't at all needed for most field work unless you have blowing sand or dirt from bikes etc..
An ND stop is essential to get long exposures in sunlight.
A Polariser is absolutely essential, it sits on my camera 90% of the time when outside.
I second this. I'd like to know a decent Polariser filter. There are cheap less than £10 on an auction site, or there are others that are more than £50.....
2nd hand is a good bet, i picked up some bargain Cokin P grads and holder recently which work really well without breaking the bank. i also use a £30 77mm jessops CP with no issues.
you pays your money you takes your chances, i mean you can get good results out of cheaper items but for the most part though good quality = £.
you pays your money you takes your chances, i mean you can get good results out of cheaper items but for the most part though good quality = £.
For manufactures B+W is highly recommend, so are heloipan. I have had much less luck with Hoya's, although some people find their Pro 1 Digital acceptable
I'd start with one at a time. Too many filters can confuse you when starting out. I also personally chose not to use UV filters. Even the most expensive will always be worse Image quality than running "naked" so I take the risk of no protection and just use a lens hood to avoid knocks (plus benefit of lens hood for flare etc).
I love ND filters. I haven't a clue what I'm doing, to be honest, but I got an ND4 and ND8 for use on my sister's camera and I got some nice (I thought) photos of Aysgarth Falls with the completely wrong light conditions (it was very sunny day at about lunchtime) for taking photos of water.
Probably don't need an ND8 though.
Probably don't need an ND8 though.
I only have two types of filters in my bag:
"Protection" filters. They stay on the glass pretty much all the time to help protect them from the careless abuse that my lenses tend to be subjected to.
ND10. See my current competition entry.
Andrew
I grabbed a HAMA polarising filter, had it for 2 years now and been very happy with it, nice build quality and good price. I love polarisation for skyscapes, the clouds become nicely enhanced, reminds me of good old mushrooms 
.
.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,537
- Location
- London
It depends on what you're shooting and where and most importantly perhaps, whether you're shooting RAW and if so whether you will PP much - any need for filters is much reduced if you are able/prepared to use lightroom/aperture and/or photoshop.