UV filters, unscientific test

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
Michael Fryd
Michael Fryd Forum Pro • Posts: 14,577
Re: Test @ 200mm

Bing Chow wrote:

So I did some testing @ 200mm with some K&F magnetic UV and CPL. Z7II, Nikon 70-200mm 2.8G, tripod, exposure delay. Shots taken within 45 seconds.

...

The challenge with these sorts of tests is that flare is very dependent on lighting.   While it is very easy to test to see if a filter causes an issue in a particular situation, it is much harder to test to see what sorts of situations cause problems.

The usual situations to examine are setups where there are lights in, or near, the field of view.  Shooting a model with the sun setting behind her (or rim lighting in a studio) is a good thing to test.  Shooting products against an overly lit, maxed out, white background is another.

When comparing the with and without images, you should find that sharpness is rarely the factor.  The most common issue is flare.  This typically manifests as "ghost images", or an overall loss of contrast (veiling flare).

Realistically, in many common studio lighting situations, a filter isn't going to make a difference.   Where you need to watch out, is at locations like a beach, where the sun shining on the front of the filter can cause veiling flare, or the sun getting to close to the field of view.  One of life's ironies is that the situations where you might be most worried about protecting your front element, are frequently the situations where you should be most worried about filters affecting image quality

 Michael Fryd's gear list:Michael Fryd's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW130 Canon EOS D60 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5DS Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +16 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow