Is it worth getting filters

Can someone please explain what filters are for and is it worth getting it.

I take mostly landscapes and portraits and have a 17-40mm and 50mm f1.8 lens.
What are the best filters around?

Leaving at least a good UV filter on your lens will always protect it from dirt and scratches. It's easier to replace a $20 filter than to pay someone $400 to have a front lens fixed, right?

If you take a lot of photos that have glare (water, metal, etc) or want deeper blues on your skies, a Polarized filter also comes in handy for that. It reduces glare on reflective objects, and brings out colors.

These are the only filters I use as well. In addition an infrared filter can give nice results, but a.f.a.i.k. the 400D isn't well suited for that.

Yes,as long as it's a good quality,multicoated....and ..you don't use a hood ALL the time.

For landscapes a set of graduated neutral density filters can be extremely helpful. Or a normal neutral density filter to blur the water in streams/waterfalls

aVolanche said:

and ..you don't use a hood ALL the time.

Click to expand...

You don't??? I do....

Anthony de Vries said:

aVolanche said:

and ..you don't use a hood ALL the time.

Click to expand...

You don't??? I do....

Click to expand...

Can be a pain with a polarizer. Also comes off when doing Cokin grads, etc.... Not ALL the time.

Worked in a camera store many years and all was told it's the cheapest insurance. Filters are high profit. Of the 1,000's of lens I saw maybe 5 need a repair from not having a filter. This myth goes back many years when coatings "could" be cleaned off. Also filters scratch much easier.

On the flip some people just freak at cleaning thier lenes. If you know how it's very rare you will cause any harm. High dust/beach areas are a great idea to use a UV. to seal the lens.

Nessa123 said:

Can someone please explain what filters are for and is it worth
getting it.

I take mostly landscapes and portraits and have a 17-40mm and 50mm
f1.8 lens.
What are the best filters around?

Click to expand...

is a circ polariser!

you can manage to get some really different look (sometimes unexpected) when shooting landscape.

eg.

http://www.pbase.com/image/65442493

something which one could waste a lot of time on the computer stimulating but a lot quicker and easier to just chuck on a circ pol.

---------
http://www.pbase.com/antidote3

These were all taken about the same time and the sky was still pale and bright.
Polarizer:
Intensified blue sky and white clouds



PolaBlue



Pola Red/Blue



Pola Yellow/blue



Pola Yallow/Blue again



Pola Red on 300mm slow shutter



Although you can emulate certain filter effects in Photoshop etc many still can't be or it's quite difficult and time consuming. The effect of altered light before the lens can have quite different effect on the sensor due mainly to it's limited dynamic range. Also while you can use a gradient filter in PS it's not so easy to emulate incidental light effects.

As for UV filters - waste of money, if you are looking for a lens protector then a neutral clear glass filter would be more preferable but it must be of decent quality ie. coatings are on both sides of the filter.

(Hoya/Kenko Pro1 Protector filter)

--
Sure I've got a photographic memory...... just needs developing!

Get the Cokin P series Holder with a set of hitec ND Grads and learn how to use them - your photography will be better for it.

I shoot mainly landscape and during the best light of the day its impossible to contain most scenes dynamic range into one, unfiltered shot.

to get the most out of them, use an ND grad, shoot RAW, and even be prepared to pocess two exposures and blend from the RAW.

Oh, and a Circ. Pol. is good too - forget UV's...
--

http://www.photosig.com/go/users/view?id=241428