I was showing a friend of mine my new camera today and she said I needed to get filters for my lenses to keep dust off of them and keep them from getting damaged. I have the 18-55mm kit lens that came with the camera plus a bundled 55-200mm lens. What exactly does a filter do? Does it just protect the lens or is there another purpose? Also, could I use the same one on both lenses? Looking on Best Buy's web site, I see so many different types of filters and brands, is there an advantage to one brand over another? Is a $10 Rocketfish filter that much worse than a $100 one? I also see UV filters, polarizers, etc. Very confusing for a newb but I was too embarrassed to ask my friend. LOL! So, what's the purpose of a filter and the difference between real cheap ones and high dollar ones? Any input would be appreciated!
Question about filters
- Thread starter ladytonya
- Start date
Michael J.
Senior Member
I use this for my 18-55.
Filters serve three purposes, really. One is to keep dust and debris off of the expensive camera lens. Another reason is to protect the more expensive camera lens. There are all kinds of filters, too, such as UV filters, Neutral Density (ND) filters, CPL (polarizer) filters, ad nausium. 
Third reason is to, obviously, filter the light before it gets to the sensor. Depending on which lens you want to put them on, filters come in all price ranges, too. Obviously the more expensive ones have benefits the cheaper ones don't...such as quality of the frame and glass, coatings, and reputation for clarity. Good ones to get are made by Tiffen (my personal preference), B+W, Cokin, Hoya, Kenko, Rodenstock, Singh-Ray, etc. I could go on and on.
Look under your lens cover....you'll see the size of the filter you need to get printed right on the inside cover.
Third reason is to, obviously, filter the light before it gets to the sensor. Depending on which lens you want to put them on, filters come in all price ranges, too. Obviously the more expensive ones have benefits the cheaper ones don't...such as quality of the frame and glass, coatings, and reputation for clarity. Good ones to get are made by Tiffen (my personal preference), B+W, Cokin, Hoya, Kenko, Rodenstock, Singh-Ray, etc. I could go on and on. Look under your lens cover....you'll see the size of the filter you need to get printed right on the inside cover.
Thanks, fotojack, that's a great explanation! I still don't know what I should get. LOL!
Do I get one for each lens? Do you attach it and just leave it there permanently or is it removable? Also, does the lens cap fit with the filter installed? Some of these might be stupid questions but hey, if I don't know the answer then I'm probably not the only one!
Do I get one for each lens? Do you attach it and just leave it there permanently or is it removable? Also, does the lens cap fit with the filter installed? Some of these might be stupid questions but hey, if I don't know the answer then I'm probably not the only one!
hehehe...hey, no worries.
Depending on the lens, it will be a different size. For instance, my 35mm lens takes a 52mm filter. My 18-105 lens takes a 67mm filter. The filter screws into your lens on the front. Don't screw it on too tight! Just snug. You want to be able to get it off! And be careful with the threads of the filter...they're very fine and easily stripped if they're cross threaded. Personally, I only use UV filters when I'm outside. In my studio, I don't use them at all. But I always use a lens hood, too, and that affords some protection, too.
A CPL (polarizer) filter shouldn't be skimped on. Get a good Hoya or Tiffen CPL filter. It, too, screws onto the front of your lens, and the outer ring rotates in order to "dial in" the amount of polarizing you want to achieve.
I found a pretty good explanation on filters and how they work at http://photographylife.com/lens-filters-explained At least the reason for them and their purpose. As far as brand quality is concerned, I'm afraid I am unsure what lens filter brands are best and why.
I hope you find this helpful.
I hope you find this helpful.
Last edited by a moderator:
I found a pretty good explanation on filters and how they work here. At least the reason for them and their purpose. As far as brand quality is concerned, I'm afraid I am unsure what lens filter brands are best and why.
I hope you find this helpful.
Bill...for some reason, that link didn't work for me.
I would get what's called a Haze 1 filter. It's basically clear and it's coated with an anti glare coating. For instance, I have a Tiffen 58mm Haze-1. Another type is what's called a Sky filter; eg: Tiffen 58mm SKY 1_A. It has an oh so slight mauve hue to it.
Go to the Tiffen web site and the Hoya web site to see all the different types of filters and sizes they have to get a better idea of what you'd like to get.
Remember...the size filter for the lens is on the inside of the lens cover of the lens you want to put the filter on.
Here's some good info on filters including the truth about Skylight/UV filters:
http://www.bythom.com/filters.htm
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
http://www.bythom.com/filters.htm
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Michael J.
Senior Member
Here I used on the Nikon 18-200mm standard ND filter to get rid of the Light-reflection on the glass and water.
Here I used the cpl filter on my 18-55. I was taking this pic up to the water-surface and the light came strong in.
Here I used the cpl filter on my 18-55. I was taking this pic up to the water-surface and the light came strong in.
Wow, thanks! That is some great info, gives me a lot to digest. I want to protect my lenses but I am also just a beginner and definitely not doing this for anything more than a hobby. My income is not unlimited, hence my purchase of the D3100 instead of a more feature-laden body. At this point, I'm in heaven. I haven't even had a point and shoot for years because since getting my first iPhone, it took better snapshots than any point and shoot I had ever used. I went to Hawaii in January, though, and was really wishing that I had something better. I got some great pics, but if I would have had this camera then they would have been better than great! I took about 500 pics last weekend at three baseball games and a lot of them came out pretty decent. I used the 55-200mm zoomed in to the max so that I could see individual players and whatnot. But I digress. I don't have massive amounts of disposable income, buying this camera was probably one of my largest expenses of the year (we actually won the trip to Hawaii so that didn't cost us a penny!) and I don't have the money to sink in to a bunch of lenses and filters. I want to have a good set of basic equipment that will do the job for me. Primarily, what I will be shooting are probably events at church (weddings, baptisms, etc.), family photos, snapshots, and ballgames that I go to. I also love taking pictures of cloud formations and sunsets. I think the two lenses I have will work for me for now, I just want them to be protected for as long as possible, hence my questions about filters once my friend made the suggestion. I think I'll head down to Best Buy and take a look at what they have. Since they aren't going to be something that is interchangeable, I need to keep it simple. Anyway, thanks for all of the advice, I really appreciate all the input!
If you don't have a lot of money to spend then don't waste it on cheap filters. No filter at all is better than a $20 UV. I personally believe no filter is better than any UV. I have some very expensive lenses and not one has a UV and none of them ever will. How do I protect my lenses? I try to be careful and always use the lens hood. Not only does the hood help prevent flare it also helps protect the lenses. The only filters I put in front of my lenses are circular polarizers and ND filters. And those are only used when necessary.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Couldn't have said it better. I am of the same mindset.
Though I am new to photography, and I agree that a chain is only as strong as the weakest link so to speak. I can't help feeling doubt about a UV not being needed at all. I have no knowledge on how lenses or sensors are made and of what materials. But I do know UV light degrades a lot of man made materials like plastics, and other materials that might be used in the making of lenses and sensors. I believe this would be a slow process and wouldn't be apparent for some time, and a person might even believe that the picture quality being poorer is do to age alone. Though an avid bird enthusiest might find his/her camera and or lenses had possibly aged faster than others.
I believe lens hoods and lens covers are likely the best choice for protecting the lens from scratches.
What I am really unsure of is if the pro's of using a UV filter outside out weight the con's of a UV lens producing lower quality pictures.
I guess UV lens quality/prices vs camera and lens cost along with the person's income are what I think should really be balanced to help make the choice.
Anyway this is all just a train of thought I had, and I could be wrong.
I believe lens hoods and lens covers are likely the best choice for protecting the lens from scratches.
What I am really unsure of is if the pro's of using a UV filter outside out weight the con's of a UV lens producing lower quality pictures.
I guess UV lens quality/prices vs camera and lens cost along with the person's income are what I think should really be balanced to help make the choice.
Anyway this is all just a train of thought I had, and I could be wrong.
Been my guiding principle to never take a lens outside without a uv or similar filter in place,in the 35mm days it served two purposes but with digital only one to protect the front element.There are two exeptions to the previous statement, my 105 sigma as the front element is set well back and if i dont use a filter i dont need the lens hood,the other was when i bought my D70 new with a 24-85 lens,the shop couldn't get me a filter until the next day so took it out to try without a filter.Guess what something got on the front element and damaged the coating,no idea what it was but had to live with it instead of being able to replace a filter.
I am not in the fortunate position of being able to replace a lens without much thought to the cost,a filter is another matter it may degrade the image or not, i have no idea but will accept it does to some extent and to be honest i dont care, its not a £3000 2.8 lens its just the best i can afford and i want it to stay like that.
In the end you have to make your own mind up i just wonder if you took 50 images off this site who would know which had a uv filter and which didn't.
mike
I am not in the fortunate position of being able to replace a lens without much thought to the cost,a filter is another matter it may degrade the image or not, i have no idea but will accept it does to some extent and to be honest i dont care, its not a £3000 2.8 lens its just the best i can afford and i want it to stay like that.
In the end you have to make your own mind up i just wonder if you took 50 images off this site who would know which had a uv filter and which didn't.
mike
Last edited:
Whatever my personal views are about filters, it's always the photographers choice. I merely present the facts the way I see them and use some common sense and gut feelings as to what I do and don't do. I never TELL people what to do or use....I merely suggest. What people do with my suggestions is entirely up to them.