UV filter results in soft images?

Totality

Totality

Totality

Soldato
Joined
5 Jul 2007
Posts
2,571
Location
NZ
Just wondering if anyone else has noticed this as I never seemed to notice it on my Canon 70-200mm L with a filter. I now have the 100-400mm L and bought a Hoya filter for it. Took some test photos and saw a kinda "ghost" image resulting in blur when cropped to 100%.

Is this normal? I was annoyed thinking I had a bad copy so took two sets of photos. Both at ISO 400 to get the speed up so ended up around 1/2000 at 400mm. IS was enabled but shouldnt have been needed at 1/2000 anyway but alas I was testing handheld shots. I took loads with each setting and they all came out the same for both sets as follows at 100% crop.

I'm using the Hoya 77mm Green series. Would the Pro 1 series being more expensive make a huge difference or are all filters just soft?

Without the filter:

1-1.jpg


With the Hoya UV filter in use:

2-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
i notice my cheap circ polariser made all my images soft so i dont use it anymore! its a very good chance you have just got a naff filter! im taking it the filters you have are not the same size?
 
The other filter I had was just a plain glass one - no UV - I've just remembered.

Dont have it anymore so cant test. It was a Canon one and not a Hoya!
 
did you buy it from a local store of fro tinternet - if a local shop then go and swap it out!
 
Unfortunately from the net. I've been reading up on it and it looks like cheapy filters (like the Hoya green series) can soften images. Was just wondering if anyone had any experience of the expensive filters.
 
I had the best 58mm Hoya UV on my 70-300, made it AF badly and very soft.

AVOID filters on zooms at all costs tbh, hell avoid any apart from ND/CPL/etc

If its damage you want to prevent, use the lens hood. :)
 
Concorde Rules said:
I had the best 58mm Hoya UV on my 70-300, made it AF badly and very soft.

AVOID filters on zooms at all costs tbh, hell avoid any apart from ND/CPL/etc

If its damage you want to prevent, use the lens hood. :)
Click to expand...

Will do! I'm glad I did the testing today when the filter arrived rather than at an event. Was just plain fluke I decided to test at 100% with the filter attached because I was actually testing the sharpness of the lens at 400mm wide open and it was nothing to do with the filter!
 
Concorde Rules said:
I had the best 58mm Hoya UV on my 70-300, made it AF badly and very soft.

AVOID filters on zooms at all costs tbh, hell avoid any apart from ND/CPL/etc

If its damage you want to prevent, use the lens hood. :)
Click to expand...

Or just use decent filters like the B&W F-pro ones I use, which have no effect on the image. I like the security of having the front element sealed away from the nasty outside world.
 
Just been doing some more tests using the 18-55mm kit lens which I never bought a filter for as its so cheap and the 50mm F1.8.

When using a filter the 50mm is as soft as the kit lens!! Seems like everything else in photography I'm going to have to splash out money to get better results. Didnt think a piece of glass would have so much effect :(

MK - Do you use the B+W F- Pro UV 010 filters? Not bothered about the 50mm getting damaged as its the same price as an expensive filter! But want one for the 100-400mm to protect it from sand, etc when out in the elements
 
Totality said:
Just been doing some more tests using the 18-55mm kit lens which I never bought a filter for as its so cheap and the 50mm F1.8.

When using a filter the 50mm is as soft as the kit lens!! Seems like everything else in photography I'm going to have to splash out money to get better results. Didnt think a piece of glass would have so much effect :(

MK - Do you use the B+W F- Pro UV 010 filters? Not bothered about the 50mm getting damaged as its the same price as an expensive filter! But want one for the 100-400mm to protect it from sand, etc when out in the elements
Click to expand...

Consider that a lens is a precise piece of engineering with minute tolerences. You then put a cheap filter infront of it and its just like shooting through a window all the time.

Yeah, those are the ones I use. I use the MRC (Multi Resistant Coating), brass rimmed ones. You can get them a fair bit cheaper from Hong Kong.
 
A filter is a piece of glass that was not in the lens formula. All you do is add air/glass/air surfaces and even with coating and a 'high quality' filter, you /will/ degrade the image, regardless of the quality.

"UV" filters are particularly useless, since 1) glass itself is a good UV filter to start with 2) the coatings /on the lens/ have been close to UV opaque since the 1960s.

So a "UV" filter is just a way of selling you warm water. No wonder Hoya can buy out Pentax. Selling snake oil must be rewarding !

Leaving a filter on 'all the time' is a good way to trap moisture and get fungus. I have about 80 lens or more, and almost all the one I've seen with a stuck filter had some form of critter around the front element.

If you want to protect your glass, use a hood or better, the lens cap. In all other cases, just learn to clean your lens without trembling in panic. Coating are very hard and resistant since the 1950s, only by doing something /stupid/ can you damage it.

+ Get a soft paintbrush. Use it only for cleaning glass, wash it often in soapy water and rince well.
+ Brush the surface of the glass and the filter ring to detach any particle.
+ Use your rocket blower energeticaly to remove any dust.
+ Use your lenspen or other cleaning cloth; stay away from microfiber /unless you wash them very often/ (all they do is spread muck)
+ Use the rocket blower one last time
+ There you go, clean. Keep your fingers off.

The brush is essential; scratches can only occur if you rub around a hard particle.
 
BusError said:
A filter is a piece of glass that was not in the lens formula. All you do is add air/glass/air surfaces and even with coating and a 'high quality' filter, you /will/ degrade the image, regardless of the quality.
Click to expand...

Agreed it will degrade the image quality, but if you use decent filters it will be to such a fractional degree that you won't be able to tell the difference without some major pixel peeping. Each to their own, but personally I feel much happier knowing the front element of my lens is protected. Ive been in several situations where the lens hood alone would not protect the lens.
 
I have Hoya Pro1D filters one all my smaller lenses and ive never noticed an ill effects in IQ... that said, i fitted them when the lenses were all new, so ive no with/without comparison shots... :confused: might have a play this weekend and see if i can tell the differance.
 
Will test again in a few weeks when the B+W one arrives. Only getting one for the 100-400mm as the 50mm F1.8 is so cheap its not worth spending loads on a filter. I've taken the cheap Hoya one off as the results were as follows at ISO 400 about 1.5m away - again at 100% crop...

With the filter:

50mm-with.jpg


Without the filter:

50mm-without.jpg
 
Messiah Khan said:
Or just use decent filters like the B&W F-pro ones I use, which have no effect on the image. I like the security of having the front element sealed away from the nasty outside world.
Click to expand...

That *was* a decent filter.. the best Hoya make and it still messed my 70-300 up.

Since then im 100% hood vs filter.

Im getting a ND10/GND/CPL 77mm filters for my 17-55 because they are useful, otherwise I think its best if its left alone.

I for one won't be putting a filter infront of my 70-200/100-400/120-300 (whichever I finally decide to get!!).

But hey thats just me :)
 
I put a hoya green on my 20-40 as its 88mm and thought id do it cheaply.

Images were awful, changed to the Hoya Pro 1 and its spot on now :)

Andy
 
got a 77mm hoya pro UV filter (for protection) on my 70-200 and it seems fine. Its such a clear piece of glass than when I took it out the packet/box, I couldn't actually tell there was any glass between the rim at all. One dirty great thumb mark later confirmed that there really is something there though :)
 
Since posting this I've been on POTN and talkphotography and there are lots of threads about cheap filters like the Hoya green series causing image problems.

Seems like anything else in photography you have to spend big to get nice photos! At least I found all this out whilst testing rather than at an actual event :)
 
I have Hoya Pros on my lenses, and am considering Marumi for my next purchase. I'll probably get the marumi 77mm CPL for my winde angle and assess the quality from there.

I don't think the filters I put on the end of my lenses drop the IQ to anywhere near the point where the camera becomes the limiting factor in my shots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom