Hoya filters

FreeStream · 6 Dec 2006 at 21:58

I have the option to get either of these to go with my 350D + 18-55 stock lens. I don't really want to mess around changes filters, so for general all round usage which would be the best out of this lot:

Hoya 58mm Super HMC PRO-1 UV £30ish
Hoya 58mm Super HMC PRO-1 Circular Polarising Filter £70ish

Hoya 58mm Standard Circular Polarising Filter £30ish

Thanks

glitch · 6 Dec 2006 at 22:04

Concorde Rules said:
Hoya 58mm Super HMC PRO-1 UV £30ish

This will keep your front element protected from damage, scratches, etc (cue ongoing argument) and the other two are more 'effects' filters.

UV are the best type of filters to always keep on and the Pro-1 range is the best of it's type, in my humble opinion.

FreeStream · 6 Dec 2006 at 22:40

glitch said:
This will keep your front element protected from damage, scratches, etc (cue ongoing argument) and the other two are more 'effects' filters.

UV are the best type of filters to always keep on and the Pro-1 range is the best of it's type, in my humble opinion.

Ok cheers m8.

One day Ill get the money together to get a 30D/70-300mm Sigma APO, and all the correct filters/bags/cards etc lol

Alex53 · 7 Dec 2006 at 12:07

Erm, dunno if I am misunderstanding, but you are going to buy a UV filter and no polariser? They arent mutually exclusive.

Granted you might want a good UV to protect your lens and not degrade the image much in the process, but the polariser is an important additional filter to have if you ever shoot in bright daylight.

It brings out the colours that the brightness of the sun takes away, it helps you not to overexpose whites and lose all the detail (see clouds and white buildings), it takes away reflections in water surfaces, windows, etc....

You can always stack the polariser on your UV if you dont want to mess around, so long as you dont mind or dont notice a loss of quality. If you do want the full image quality your lens can give, then welcome to photography, messing around is required.

FranchiseJuan · 7 Dec 2006 at 13:05

I have a number of lenses, and Had two boddies untill recetly, and don't have a circular and rarely have I missed having one. You don't REALLY need one.

woodsy2k · 8 Dec 2006 at 11:17

By that argument though mate, you dont NEED any filter. Everything can be done in PS. But you ask any professional photographer, and they will use physical filters instead of virtual ones. Simply because the results can never really be properly replicated.

Alex53 · 8 Dec 2006 at 11:23

One of the main reasons the polariser remains important is PS cannot replicate its effect.

(At least not without some serious out of this world ability. I mean, yes you might be able to remove a reflection in PS but not replace it with whatever was behind that window that the filter would have revealed.)

Yes, straight forward coloured filters, warm up, cooling, etc. are judged to be a waste of money by most photographers nowadays.

FreeStream · 8 Dec 2006 at 13:16

I just need a protector and something to make my images a little better, if a UV will do the job then fine by me

Raymond Lin · 8 Dec 2006 at 13:18

Concorde Rules said:
I just need a protector and something to make my images a little better, if a UV will do the job then fine by me

The UV filter won't make the image "better", but will protect the lens from the elements.

FreeStream · 8 Dec 2006 at 13:21

Raymond Lin said:
The UV filter won't make the image "better", but will protect the lens from the elements.

Well, they say reduces hazyness?

Im not prepared to let my dad spend £70 on a filter, in not that professional. UV will do me.

Raymond Lin · 8 Dec 2006 at 13:28

Concorde Rules said:
Well, they say reduces hazyness?

Im not prepared to let my dad spend £70 on a filter, in not that professional. UV will do me.

In theory, but in reality it is VERY hard to tell.

glitch · 8 Dec 2006 at 14:59

Concorde Rules said:
Im not prepared to let my dad spend £70 on a filter, in not that professional. UV will do me.

Just get the UV, stick it on the lens and forget about it. Don't worry about looking at other filters and lenses until you've exhausted all your options and simply cannot continue without spending out.

olv · 8 Dec 2006 at 18:10

i dont see the point in uv filters if i'm honest. it's not as if you walk around smashing the front of your camera on stuff.

growse · 8 Dec 2006 at 19:01

olv said:
i dont see the point in uv filters if i'm honest. it's not as if you walk around smashing the front of your camera on stuff.

They're easier to clean.

Also, they're cheap if they get scratched/marked. If you're trying to take a photo and someone walks into your camera (has happened to me), then I'd rather they messed up the filter than the lens.

ElDude · 9 Dec 2006 at 14:19

£70 for a circular polariser? I just got a Hoya CP for my 50mm for £14.99 from a well known film processing shop that also sells cameras and bad tripods

Look for them on the web and if it's a UK based website they will price match.

FreeStream · 9 Dec 2006 at 16:46

ElDude said:
£70 for a circular polariser? I just got a Hoya CP for my 50mm for £14.99 from a well known film processing shop that also sells cameras and bad tripods Look for them on the web and if it's a UK based website they will price match.

Yes, the best ones are £70 quid.

G4AJG · 9 Dec 2006 at 19:40

ElDude said:
£70 for a circular polariser? I just got a Hoya CP for my 50mm for £14.99 from a well known film processing shop that also sells cameras and bad tripods Look for them on the web and if it's a UK based website they will price match.

Save your money and take the above advise! I've just up-graded from the £14.99 brand filters to the expensive B + W UV filters, but my lens demand the extra cost (unfortunatley :-(

With your 18-55 stock lens, treat it as a beginner/starter lens. Soon you will probably want to up-grade you lens, so save on the expensive filter for now and save the money for a future lens.