Coating and Filters for lens?

[Brisn5757]

I came across the sight below when I was considering having a coating put on my eyesight glasses. This made me wonder if it's possible to get similar filters for camera lens. Maybe the more expensive lens have a similar coating on them such as Ultra Clear.

Take a look at the tab options in this site and is you hold the slider and move it then you can see the difference.

Loading…

www.specsavers.co.nz

Are there any of these coatings available as filters for camera lens?


Brian

 

[Leonard Migliore]

I came across the sight below when I was considering having a coating put on my eyesight glasses. This made me wonder if it's possible to get similar filters for camera lens. Maybe the more expensive lens have a similar coating on them such as Ultra Clear.

Take a look at the tab options in this site and is you hold the slider and move it then you can see the difference.

https://www.specsavers.co.nz/glasses/lens-guide/lens-options

Are there any of these coatings available as filters for camera lens?

Brian

All modern lenses have anti-reflection coatings on all their elements; they would otherwise be unusable due to flare. Some lenses have water-repellent fluorine coatings on their front elements.

None of the other types of coatings seem appropriate to me as being permanently coated on a camera lens. You probably don't want a photochromic, while polarizers are best used as separate filters.

 

[Brisn5757]

I came across the sight below when I was considering having a coating put on my eyesight glasses. This made me wonder if it's possible to get similar filters for camera lens. Maybe the more expensive lens have a similar coating on them such as Ultra Clear.

Take a look at the tab options in this site and is you hold the slider and move it then you can see the difference.

https://www.specsavers.co.nz/glasses/lens-guide/lens-options

Are there any of these coatings available as filters for camera lens?

Brian

All modern lenses have anti-reflection coatings on all their elements; they would otherwise be unusable due to flare. Some lenses have water-repellent fluorine coatings on their front elements.

None of the other types of coatings seem appropriate to me as being permanently coated on a camera lens. You probably don't want a photochromic, while polarizers are best used as separate filters.

Thanks for your reply Leonard.

I'm wondering if you combined a UV filter with a filter for reducing blue then maybe the result would be that of a UltraDrive tint (as referred to in the internet link. Maybe it would reduce too much light.

I know UV filters were popular, hey also projected the lens; are they still popular or maybe lens have a UV coating on them these days?

Brian

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

I came across the sight below when I was considering having a coating put on my eyesight glasses. This made me wonder if it's possible to get similar filters for camera lens. Maybe the more expensive lens have a similar coating on them such as Ultra Clear.

Take a look at the tab options in this site and is you hold the slider and move it then you can see the difference.

https://www.specsavers.co.nz/glasses/lens-guide/lens-options

Are there any of these coatings available as filters for camera lens?

Brian

All modern lenses have anti-reflection coatings on all their elements; they would otherwise be unusable due to flare. Some lenses have water-repellent fluorine coatings on their front elements.

None of the other types of coatings seem appropriate to me as being permanently coated on a camera lens. You probably don't want a photochromic, while polarizers are best used as separate filters.

Thanks for your reply Leonard.

I'm wondering if you combined a UV filter with a filter for reducing blue then maybe the result would be that of a UltraDrive tint (as referred to in the internet link. Maybe it would reduce too much light.

I know UV filters were popular, hey also projected the lens; are they still popular or maybe lens have a UV coating on them these days?

Digital sensors have UV and IR filters attached so there's no benefit to adding a second UV filter. Whether such filters do, in fact, protect lenses is a separate question frequently done to death here.

Brian

 

[Brisn5757]

I came across the sight below when I was considering having a coating put on my eyesight glasses. This made me wonder if it's possible to get similar filters for camera lens. Maybe the more expensive lens have a similar coating on them such as Ultra Clear.

Take a look at the tab options in this site and is you hold the slider and move it then you can see the difference.

https://www.specsavers.co.nz/glasses/lens-guide/lens-options

Are there any of these coatings available as filters for camera lens?

Brian

All modern lenses have anti-reflection coatings on all their elements; they would otherwise be unusable due to flare. Some lenses have water-repellent fluorine coatings on their front elements.

None of the other types of coatings seem appropriate to me as being permanently coated on a camera lens. You probably don't want a photochromic, while polarizers are best used as separate filters.

Thanks for your reply Leonard.

I'm wondering if you combined a UV filter with a filter for reducing blue then maybe the result would be that of a UltraDrive tint (as referred to in the internet link. Maybe it would reduce too much light.

I know UV filters were popular, hey also projected the lens; are they still popular or maybe lens have a UV coating on them these days?

Digital sensors have UV and IR filters attached so there's no benefit to adding a second UV filter. Whether such filters do, in fact, protect lenses is a separate question frequently done to death here.

Brian

I really must read what I have written to make corrections before posting. It's good that you understood it.

When I said protection I mean having a filter prevents physical damage to the lens. Also if something lands on the lens then if there's a filter on the lens you could remove the filter and carry on photographing.

With programs like Lightroom and Photoshop then maybe the days of putting a filter on the lens for a certain scene are disappearing.

Brian

 

[Michael Fryd]

.

I really must read what I have written to make corrections before posting. It's good that you understood it.

When I said protection I mean having a filter prevents physical damage to the lens.

Less so than one might think. Filters are made of thin fragile glass. They don't provide very much physical protection before they break. There are actually situations where a bare lens would be unharmed, where the broken filter might cause damage.

Realistically, Filters typically don't make much of a difference in terms of physical protection, and they don't usually affect image quality. Your lens will probably survive unharmed without a filter, and your image will likely still look good with a filter.

What they do do, is to bring out emotions. If using a protective filter makes you feel more comfortable, then you should use one. If a filter makes you worry about image quality, then avoid them. Frankly, how they affect feelings is their biggest effect.

Also if something lands on the lens then if there's a filter on the lens you could remove the filter and carry on photographing.

Usually, it's faster and easier to clean the front element. If you are in a situation where you are worried about something falling on the lens, then you shouldn't be taking the filter off. You should be cleaning the filter so it can continue to provide protection.

You need to clean the filter as carefully as you would the front element. As you are shooting through the filter, the quality and condition of the that filter is as important as the quality and condition of your lens.

Of course, if you are in a situation where you are worried about dust, fluids, etc., you probably want to protect the barrel more than the lens. The front element is easy to clean. It can be a disaster if fluids or contamination get under the focus/zoom rings or into the barrel. Contamination inside the lens barrel is a major problem for a lens. Such contamination doesn't enter the lens through the solid glass front element, it usually enters through breathing holes under zoom/focus rings.

In terms of protecting the front glass, use a lens hood. This is a big help in keeping fingerprints and other contamination off the front piece of glass, whether it's your front element or a filter. The lens hood also has an advantage of reducing flare (this is more important if you are using filters on a digital camera)

With programs like Lightroom and Photoshop then maybe the days of putting a filter on the lens for a certain scene are disappearing.

There are still situations where you need the filter as you can't easily replicate the effect in post processing. Polarizing filters and neutral density filters are two examples that come to mind.

 

[Mark B.]

I came across the sight below when I was considering having a coating put on my eyesight glasses. This made me wonder if it's possible to get similar filters for camera lens. Maybe the more expensive lens have a similar coating on them such as Ultra Clear.

Take a look at the tab options in this site and is you hold the slider and move it then you can see the difference.

https://www.specsavers.co.nz/glasses/lens-guide/lens-options

Are there any of these coatings available as filters for camera lens?

Brian

All modern lenses have anti-reflection coatings on all their elements; they would otherwise be unusable due to flare. Some lenses have water-repellent fluorine coatings on their front elements.

None of the other types of coatings seem appropriate to me as being permanently coated on a camera lens. You probably don't want a photochromic, while polarizers are best used as separate filters.

Thanks for your reply Leonard.

I'm wondering if you combined a UV filter with a filter for reducing blue then maybe the result would be that of a UltraDrive tint (as referred to in the internet link. Maybe it would reduce too much light.

I know UV filters were popular, hey also projected the lens; are they still popular or maybe lens have a UV coating on them these days?

Digital sensors have UV and IR filters attached so there's no benefit to adding a second UV filter. Whether such filters do, in fact, protect lenses is a separate question frequently done to death here.

Brian

I really must read what I have written to make corrections before posting. It's good that you understood it.

When I said protection I mean having a filter prevents physical damage to the lens. Also if something lands on the lens then if there's a filter on the lens you could remove the filter and carry on photographing.

Where are you shooting and under what conditions that you're worrying about something "landing" on the lens? I've been shooting with interchangeable lens cameras since the mid 90's. With the exception of the first few years with film cameras, I've never used filters for protection. I've found that the correct lens hood does an exemplary job of protecting the front of the lens from all sorts of the normal environmental hazards. Unless you're shooting in gale force winds, welding or cutting operations, trackside at a race where small projectiles are common, etc, the lens hood is all the average enthusiast will ever need. My lenses show no damage at all, and they're just as easy to clean as a filter.

With programs like Lightroom and Photoshop then maybe the days of putting a filter on the lens for a certain scene are disappearing.

Brian

There are a couple filters I have for many of my lenses. First, a circular polarizer is not as simple to duplicate in PS. Second, a ND filter can be used to slow down the shutter speed and enable the type of motion blur that you cannot do simply in post.

Mark

 

[Dr JLW]

The coating for eyeglasses is especially useful for night driving It reduces "ghost images" of bright objects like street lights in your field of vision. These are due to reflected light from your eye to the rear surface of your glasses and back into your eye.

Similarly UV coating in eyeglasses are very useful especially if you encounter bright sources at night like fireworks.

(BTW UV blockage is especially important on sunglasses because they keep your eye iris open so more UV can get to your retina but UV on the outside of eh eye is also bad causing cataracts so if you are out in the sun with dark glasses be sure they have UV blockage)

Photographic lenses have the same problem with ghost images unless they have good anti reflection coatings. Today's fast lenses and 10 plus element zoom lenses would not be possible without very good coatings for anti reflection.

A typical glass element reduces UV by a factor of about ten. Thus, a ten element zoom takes UV down by about 10 to the tenth power. Most digital sensors have an filter over them to take out both UV and IR radiation. This is done because this radiation is rarely focused well by camera lenses focused on visible light. OTW, the UV and IR would add a haze to image if not blocked.

My experience has been that UV blockage is very good on most camera lenses today such that a UV filter or lens protector is not useful for that purpose and can do more harm than good.

The only external filters I use are polarizers, which we discussed in another thread.

 

[Brisn5757]

.

I really must read what I have written to make corrections before posting. It's good that you understood it.

When I said protection I mean having a filter prevents physical damage to the lens.

Less so than one might think. Filters are made of thin fragile glass. They don't provide very much physical protection before they break. There are actually situations where a bare lens would be unharmed, where the broken filter might cause damage.

Realistically, Filters typically don't make much of a difference in terms of physical protection, and they don't usually affect image quality. Your lens will probably survive unharmed without a filter, and your image will likely still look good with a filter.

What they do do, is to bring out emotions. If using a protective filter makes you feel more comfortable, then you should use one. If a filter makes you worry about image quality, then avoid them. Frankly, how they affect feelings is their biggest effect.

Also if something lands on the lens then if there's a filter on the lens you could remove the filter and carry on photographing.

Usually, it's faster and easier to clean the front element. If you are in a situation where you are worried about something falling on the lens, then you shouldn't be taking the filter off. You should be cleaning the filter so it can continue to provide protection.

You need to clean the filter as carefully as you would the front element. As you are shooting through the filter, the quality and condition of the that filter is as important as the quality and condition of your lens.

Of course, if you are in a situation where you are worried about dust, fluids, etc., you probably want to protect the barrel more than the lens. The front element is easy to clean. It can be a disaster if fluids or contamination get under the focus/zoom rings or into the barrel. Contamination inside the lens barrel is a major problem for a lens. Such contamination doesn't enter the lens through the solid glass front element, it usually enters through breathing holes under zoom/focus rings.

In terms of protecting the front glass, use a lens hood. This is a big help in keeping fingerprints and other contamination off the front piece of glass, whether it's your front element or a filter. The lens hood also has an advantage of reducing flare (this is more important if you are using filters on a digital camera)

With programs like Lightroom and Photoshop then maybe the days of putting a filter on the lens for a certain scene are disappearing.

There are still situations where you need the filter as you can't easily replicate the effect in post processing. Polarizing filters and neutral density filters are two examples that come to mind.

Thanks Michael for the advice and information.


Is it safe to use a microfibre cloth to clean camera lens or filter?

I often wonder how people protect camera lens when taking photos on a beach with sand blowing in the wind..

At lease most cameras have a lens cap to protect the lens when the camer is not in use. Smartphones lack this protection.


Brian

 

[Michael Fryd]

...

Thanks Michael for the advice and information.

Is it safe to use a microfibre cloth to clean camera lens or filter?

Yes.

I often wonder how people protect camera lens when taking photos on a beach with sand blowing in the wind..

The real danger is not sand on the front element, but sand getting into the lens through air holes under the zoom and focus rings. Filters don't help there. Something like a lens coat will help protect the barrel.

In terms of sand on the glass, just wipe it off gently. Don't press hard to rub it into the glass.

At lease most cameras have a lens cap to protect the lens when the camer is not in use. Smartphones lack this protection.

Brian

 

[MrBrightSide]

If you look at photo magazines from the 1950s there are ads for places you could send your lenses to get them coated.

Im sure if you searched you could still find a company that would coat your optics, or take off the coating which might be kind of interesting with a 4 role 5 element lens

As for protection filters, do whatever feels right; there are good arguments on both sides... you just have to view it like any other religious issue where the two sides will never agree.

 

[Leonard Migliore]

Is it safe to use a microfibre cloth to clean camera lens or filter?
I often wonder how people protect camera lens when taking photos on a beach with sand blowing in the wind..

At lease most cameras have a lens cap to protect the lens when the camer is not in use. Smartphones lack this protection.

Besides sand, ocean beaches often have salt spray. This can get on the camera and lenses. I typically use a clear filter on my lenses when I'm shooting in conditions where salt water is spraying around. When I'm done I wipe off the camera and rinse the filter under a water tap; I don't think it's good to wipe salt crystals off of glass because of the danger of scratching it.

 

[Michael Fryd]

...

Besides sand, ocean beaches often have salt spray. This can get on the camera and lenses. I typically use a clear filter on my lenses when I'm shooting in conditions where salt water is spraying around. When I'm done I wipe off the camera and rinse the filter under a water tap; I don't think it's good to wipe salt crystals off of glass because of the danger of scratching it.

A wet microfiber cloth will dissolve the salt. However if you want to use a filter, that's fine too.

However, a very real danger to the lens is salt on the barrel, and getting under the zoom/focus rings. If you feel you need to protect the front element, you are probably in a situation where it is as least as important to protect the air holes in the barrel. The front element can be easily cleaned. Cleaning salt from the interior of the lens is much more difficult

 

[Brisn5757]

Is it safe to use a microfibre cloth to clean camera lens or filter?
I often wonder how people protect camera lens when taking photos on a beach with sand blowing in the wind..

At lease most cameras have a lens cap to protect the lens when the camer is not in use. Smartphones lack this protection.

Besides sand, ocean beaches often have salt spray. This can get on the camera and lenses. I typically use a clear filter on my lenses when I'm shooting in conditions where salt water is spraying around. When I'm done I wipe off the camera and rinse the filter under a water tap; I don't think it's good to wipe salt crystals off of glass because of the danger of scratching it.

The problem is when your not done of having to remove the sea sprayed lens. Maybe removing the filter pouring water on it and then wiping it dry would work.

But in my experience of beach photography I's never had the problem and if the wind is bad then I wait for better conditions. How ever there are times when you travel to a place and need to take a photo regardless of the conditions.

Brian