UV Filters for Contax G Lenses

[bobbl46]

See:

http://www.adorama.com/HPB60SKY.html

This explanation seems straight-forward.

Keep in mind that some of this MAY be wasted on print film and high street processing shops

Or am I teaching my granny to suck eggs?

Cheers, Bob.

 

[farnborough]

Hi Bob, just visited the site you quoted. Pics with Filter look worse and more bluish than those without filter. Whats the sense? Regards , Peter

 

[urgenta]

Hi

I learned, todays lenses do not need UV-filters, that's why the lens-coating makes this filters obsolete. Some recommend it to protect the frontlense. But the filters should be of the same quality like the lens.

If with or without - good shooting.

Hans Villars, Switzerland

 

[bobbl46]

Dunno! I only use UV and only to protect front element from water splash, twigs, sand, people who don't know where not to put their fingers, dust, tobacco smoke, coughs, sneezes, coffee and beer splashes (Don't ask how I manage to do all this and take photos at the same time

)!

And ..... I'd rather have the filter or hood edge "dinked" then my lens barrel edge "dinked" (when it's me that was careless)!

Cheers, Bob.

 

[jsmisc]

I'm with you there Bob. I only use UV and for that purpose (or some of them!) too. I've never noticed any degradation in picture quality either with or without filter. I tend to use B&W filters now but I have often used cheap second hand ones in the past.
John

 

[gjames52]

"Heliopan KR 1.5 Skylight (1A) filter is a light salmon colored skylight filter that reduces bluish cast in scenic photography" etc.

I believe that the Adorama website has posted the photos incorrectly. Certainly the effect of the photographs on page 13 are in the Heliopan catalogue coded 089-890- 27 800 are opposite of those posted on the Adorama website.

My experience with these filters has been positive and now I use them with all of my lenses when not using other filters for specific purposes.


Regards

Gilbert
I believe that the Adorama website has posted the photos incorrectly. Certainly the effect of the photographson page 13 are opposite in the Heliopan catalogue coded 089-890- 27 800 p

 

[rob_l]

I have a 28mm 45mm and 90mm lens, and I would never think of not having the filters (non Contax) on the lens. I value them too much to risk a stupid wrong move leading to any disruption of the lens surface.

 

[rickd]

Hi Rob,

There's nothing wrong with using "protective" filters, so long as you're willing to accept that you're adding two air-to-glass surfaces to your optical "chain" and altering performance, however slightly.

I use filters in response to the situation--if there are environmental conditions, e.g., moisture and dust, or if there's a chance of smacking the camera into something, then I'm pretty likely to use one. But in more benign settings I do without, counting on myself and the lens hood to protect against the unexpected. I think it's important to wring every bit of performance out of the Zeiss lenses.

As a side note, I'm discussing protective filters and not filters chosen to enhance the photograph.

In over thirty years of shooting I've never once damaged either a filter or a lens front element in a mishap.

Best regards,

Rick

 

[saspencr]

i havent' yet used any for the g2, but would guess that flare would be worse.

 

[wilsonlaidlaw1]

Scott, Much to my surprise the reverse seemed to be the case. I have had fewer problems with flare since fitting a Hoya UV filter to the 45mm than before. I know there is no logic to it but perhaps the filter ring acts like a mini sun-hood? Wilson