UV filters, unscientific test

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
imhosting
imhosting Junior Member • Posts: 39
Re: Test @ 200mm

Bing Chow wrote:

I won't bother to show the results between unfiltered vs UV because there isn't any.

Sure we just take your word for it.

I don't see a difference. This is consistent with another test that I've done, with other brands.

Does this test really mimic real word conditions? It's indoors on a tripod, I would hardly think that is a common situation to be using filters.

So people who report degradation are either using REALLY bad filters, using less rigorous technique (flimsy tripod, handholding, difficult subjects, changing outdoor conditions), or they're just parroting what they read and they haven't really tested themselves.

It's physics, whether you can tell a difference or not, there is degradation.

I was going stack a 10 stop filter on top of the UV and CPL but the shutter speeds are too long for indoors.

 imhosting's gear list:imhosting's gear list
Canon EOS 50D A3000
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow