Anyone using filters?

[Bowen 0]

Hey guys,

I was just wondering if anyone uses filters and or hoods on their still setups?

I think I am ordering a Canon 10-22mm lens tomarow and I am also wanting to get a filter to protect it. B&H has one for like 35.00 bucks. It is a UV filter.

link: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart&A=details&Q=&sku=213212&is=REG

anyone using this or something simular?

I am also considering a hood for ground shots but what about freefall. anyone ever use a hood in freefall?

Thanks,
M. Bowen

Retired Tunnel Instructor, Sky/Tunnel Coach

Former dealer for 2k Composites, Skysystems, Alti-2, Wings

[namgrunt 0]

I use UV and sometimes circular polarizer and hoods always.

spend the extra bucks and get multi coated UC

course I never leave the ground

NIKON D200 with SIGMA 50-500 mm might be a bit much to jump

.

59 YEARS,OVERWEIGHT,BALDIND,X-GRUNT
LAST MIL. JUMP VIET-NAM(QUAN-TRI)
www.dzmemories.com

[PhreeZone 15]

Get the best UV Filer you can buy. Why spend that much money on a lens only to put a filter on it that lowers the quality of the image?

I'm getting rid of my cheap Tiffen filters and upgrading to B&W filters on my telephoto lens and something else on my widetele since I an tell a difference in sharpness when the filter is on vs off.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[pilotdave 0]

I would stay FAR away from the canon filter. I used to have one on my 18-55. The problem is that it's not coated so you get more reflections than you will with a better filter. I did a bunch of research on filters when I was having problems, and I read over and over again how bad canon filters are. B+W is considered one of the best.

Here's an example of a picture sort of ruined by the canon filter: http://www.skydivingstills.com/gallery/2101824/1/108537262#108537262-A-LB. See the yellow spot below spiderman's chest strap?

I ended up replacing it with a B+W filter. Still fairly cheap in the 58mm size for the 18-55 lens, but pretty freaking pricey at 77mm. If you get one, make sure it is an "MRC" filter. That's the coating that makes the big difference.

At 10mm, it's possible you'll need a slim filter to avoid seeing the edges of it. I'm pretty sure I've read that you don't need a slim filter for that lens, but if you do, that makes it even more expensive.

The 77mm version of the filter I bought is at http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11994-REG/B_W_66070252_77mm_UV_Haze_010.html... $80. I personally wouldn't do it. The front element of the 10-22 is better protected, and it's just too expensive in my opinion. The filter does NOT improve picture quality and may very well degrade quality. It does nothing but protect the lens.

If you do something stupid like me and drop your lens on a hard floor, the filter might help... mine shattered but left the lens apparently perfect. I like having the protection even on my cheap lens, but I'm not sure I'd spend $80 for the small amount of protection it offers.

Dave

[DSE 3]

Quote

I'm not sure I'd spend $80 for the small amount of protection it offers.

Dave

Bear in mind that once the coating on the 10-22 has been compromised, it's lost a huge amount of its value. Same goes for any lens; once the coating has been compromised....it's not repairable for any reasonable sum.
80.00 for a UV over a 700.00 lens is like an insurance policy.
re; circular polarizers, not a good idea for most skydiving activities.

[The111 0]

I've got a Tiffen UV filter on my Canon 10-22mm. I think it was $30. My pictures look ok to me, but I have never really compared it to shots taken without the filter since it's always been on there.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Icon134 0]

Quote

re; circular polarizers, not a good idea for most skydiving activities.

ok, because I'm curious... why is a circular polarizer not a good idea for skydiving?

I understand some of the reasons that someone would want to use a polarizer (in general)... I'm just curious why there would be reasons not to use it skydiving.

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[DSE 3]

Quote

Quote

re; circular polarizers, not a good idea for most skydiving activities.

ok, because I'm curious... why is a circular polarizer not a good idea for skydiving?

I understand some of the reasons that someone would want to use a polarizer (in general)... I'm just curious why there would be reasons not to use it skydiving.

With a circular polarizer, you're cutting frequencies in variable amounts. In skydiving, you're not at the same horizontal position like you are on the ground. if you were to use a C/P (never linear P because most still cams are split beam and are used w/autofocus), skydiving is where a cheap filter would be better (IMO) than a good quality circular, because it won't be as accurate, and will still allow contrasts to be better. I use one occasionally, particularly when haze is nasty down below. The attached image has a circ on it, set to roughly 90 degrees. No color correction, it's just compressed.
You can get away with a circ, you just need to plan on flying at somewhat proscribed angles due to the way the PL shutters/phase are placed.
Additionally, it's often challenging using filters on very wide angle lenses. Reflections are a problem.

[mccordia 73]

I sometimes use fog-filters on my video...but not intentional..
I use a cheep UV filter for protection on my stills-cam.

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[dragon2 0]

I generally jump without any filters since i usually jump a 16mm fisheye. For my other "good" lenses I have good UV filters though, ranging from B&W multicoated to Tiffen for cheap. If my still lens took a filter I'd put one on, but a good one not a cheapo.

My 16mm comes with a built-in hood, i'd be afraid any other type might break with the speeds we're going, and the floppy types are of course no good either.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[namgrunt 0]

Quote

Quote

re; circular polarizers, not a good idea for most skydiving activities.

ok, because I'm curious... why is a circular polarizer not a good idea for skydiving?

I understand some of the reasons that someone would want to use a polarizer (in general)... I'm just curious why there would be reasons not to use it skydiving.

CAN SOMEONE DO A PIC WITH AND WITHOUT c/p FILTER AND CLOUDS IN THE BACKGROUND?

sorry for cap lock ..my bad

.

59 YEARS,OVERWEIGHT,BALDIND,X-GRUNT
LAST MIL. JUMP VIET-NAM(QUAN-TRI)
www.dzmemories.com

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

re; circular polarizers, not a good idea for most skydiving activities.

ok, because I'm curious... why is a circular polarizer not a good idea for skydiving?

I understand some of the reasons that someone would want to use a polarizer (in general)... I'm just curious why there would be reasons not to use it skydiving.

CAN SOMEONE DO A PIC WITH AND WITHOUT c/p FILTER AND CLOUDS IN THE BACKGROUND?

sorry for cap lock ..my bad

.

A comparison picture can be seen here.

The use of filters in the photography world is much like the RSL debate in skydiving. What ever your stance on them is, if you decide to use them, don't use cheap ones, it defeats the purpose of having a quality lens attached to the camera in the first place. Filters are like tools (IMO) and you need to use the right tool for the job at hand. Just as you wouldn't use a hammer to take a screw out, don't put a filter on and forget about it for all of your skydives. IMO, skydiving photographers usually don't find themselves in situations where a filter would be needed as much as say a landscape photographer.Also keep in mind the use of a polarizing filter on a wide angle lens will render some parts of the sky darker than others dependent on where the light is coming from.

If you're worried about protecting the lens and are jumping and living in a harsh environment with lots of sand (like AZ) then a quality filter may be in order. My observation is that some people that live and jump every day in that environment use filters and some don't. For every story of how a filter saved a lens there is a would have been money shot with filter flares/stars on it sitting in a drawer. Modern lenses have a protective coating on them already, most people don't need to use a filter(s) but are convinced they do and in doing so create more issues for themselves. I have found that most professional photographers, some of which take photos in places like the wilds of Africa,in war zones and even skydiving don't use filters most of the time unless the shot requires it. YMMV.

A good, albeit short, description of filters can be read here

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Icon134 0]

Thanks DSE... I think I sort of understand what you mean...

I do understand why you shouldn't use a linear polarizer... but ultimately the reasons to use a C/P would depend on the conditions I'm expecting to shoot in.

I use an inexpensive UV Filter for my 17mm lens but have been giving serious consideration to getting a Multi-coated lens... and probably will switch before next spring.

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[DSE 3]

Quote

For every story of how a filter saved a lens there is a would have been money shot with filter flares/stars on it sitting in a drawer.

Well...there *is* always Photoshop.

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Quote

For every story of how a filter saved a lens there is a would have been money shot with filter flares/stars on it sitting in a drawer.

Well...there *is* always Photoshop.

Very true. But if thats the case why bother with a filter at all when you can just make the sky a deeper blue in post? Personally, I like to spend a few more minutes making sure I have my cameras set up for the situation so I get the best shot possible and less time in post hoping I can manipulate the shot to look good. It's just a technique I and a few others like to use.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[DSE 3]

No argument from me, Scott. I hate having to color correct, etc in post. I far prefer getting it right in camera. In the production world, you don't get far with the attitude of "we can fix it in post."
but there still is always Photoshop.

[The111 0]

Quote

For every story of how a filter saved a lens there is a would have been money shot with filter flares/stars on it sitting in a drawer.

I don't think I've ever had a shot ruined like this, with my filter.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Quote

For every story of how a filter saved a lens there is a would have been money shot with filter flares/stars on it sitting in a drawer.

I don't think I've ever had a shot ruined like this, with my filter.

How about the un cropped original file of this shot you took a while back? I remember spending a bit of time in PS removing a flare/spot before sending it back to you. Not only can they sometimes ruin otherwise good photos, filters can sometimes cause you to work harder in post to clean them up. YMMV.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[iamsam 0]

filters filters filters, so a quick word about hoods

I am a professional (terrestrial) stills photographer and always use a lens hood (bar a few exceptions - shooting through glass being one). Will cut extra light affecting meter reading and prevents lens flare. No brainer IMHO.

edit 4 spelling as always..

but what do I know

[DSE 3]

Quote

filters filters filters, so a quick word about hoods

I am a professional (terrestrial) stills photographer and always use a lens hood.... No brainer IMHO.

edit 4 spelling as always..

Wait'll you start jumping with one before figuring it's a no-brainer.
Doesn't have the same impact in the air as on the ground, either.
On the ground, I always use a mattebox and usually a follow focus, and often have a focus puller. Doesn't work so well in the air, although I'm considering doing a spoof jump with a mattebox and focus puller.

[mccordia 73]

Quote

Wait'll you start jumping with one before figuring it's a no-brainer.
Doesn't have the same impact in the air as on the ground, either.
On the ground, I always use a mattebox and usually a follow focus, and often have a focus puller. Doesn't work so well in the air, although I'm considering doing a spoof jump with a mattebox and focus puller.

And two people holding you stable, listed as "Grip", and a cute girl with a notepad flying behind you, taking polaroids and writing down things for continuity

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[DSE 3]

Quote

Quote

Wait'll you start jumping with one before figuring it's a no-brainer.
Doesn't have the same impact in the air as on the ground, either.
On the ground, I always use a mattebox and usually a follow focus, and often have a focus puller. Doesn't work so well in the air, although I'm considering doing a spoof jump with a mattebox and focus puller.

OOH!! I like THAT idea!
And two people holding you stable, listed as "Grip", and a cute girl with a notepad flying behind you, taking polaroids and writing down things for continuity