Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

Started 6 months ago | Discussions
highdesertmesa
highdesertmesa Senior Member • Posts: 1,233
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

Painter19 wrote:

highdesertmesa wrote:

Of the protective filters I've used over the years on GF and other lenses (Canon RF, Leica M):

Breakthrough – Top quality. Never buy from their "official" Amazon store. I got two filters in a row that had been replaced – one was a fake and another was a different brand filter entirely. Always order direct from their website, and you may have to wait months for some filters types and sizes to come back into stock.

Zeiss T* UV – same quality as breakthrough but with aluminum rings instead of brass. I prefer brass, but I like the T* coating so I use them almost exclusively

B+W MRC Nano – I stopped using these as I confirmed that for some lenses they could have a negative impact on corner performance versus no filter or versus the Zeiss T* UV filter. These were genuine B+W filters from Adorama and B&H purchased over different time periods, so I ruled out it being a bad batch. I have no idea why – perhaps the nano coating can do strange things to the light ray angles with some lenses. I doubt it's because of the glass quality itself. In any case, I stopped using them completely as I didn't want to have to test every lens with them.

Leica UV – Not that any sane person would use these, but since I'm not sane, I've bought them for my Leica M lenses before. They use aluminum rings that can get easily stuck/jammed (versus Zeiss UV's aluminum rings which just tend to never get super tight). I have had these negatively impact corner performance on some Leica M lenses.

Like others, I have to use protective filters due to the environments I shoot in.

For polarization for digital cameras, I use Heliopan linear polarizers. No need to use circular polarizers and have to deal with the strange angles of darkening you can get. With a linear filter, you simply are dialing in the strength of the effect by rotating the filter.

To return to B+W for a second. Did your testing showing some loss of corner sharpness using B+W protective lenses include their clear protective lenses?

I was using only the Clear MRC Nano. Never owned (that I recall) a B+W UV.

Manzur Fahim
Manzur Fahim Veteran Member • Posts: 3,833
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

Painter19 wrote:

Hello again, I’ve gotten so much helpful info here recently I’m hoping to hear the thoughts of others on filters for the Fujinon gf 32-64mm f4, and gf 100-200mm lenses I have to use with my Fujifilm 50s II .

I had in mind UV filters for each lens to use as lens protectors . I’m also thinking about a ND filter or 2 or 3? for each lens, and perhaps a polarizer? I don’t know if a filter holder that I could use on both lenses, or separate sets of screw-in filters for each lens would be best? I’m also wondering if the front lens caps for each lens will fit over screw-in filters like the UV filter?

Aside from those questions I’d appreciate any recommendations as to specific brands, or model #’s of filters . Thanks for any thoughts. I’ll just add I’ll be shooting landscape mostly . A good amount of that will be in the desert, lots of skies, some surf on occasion, some shooting in snow, etc..

I only use UV filters as sort of a protector filter. My choice of brand is B+W. Their MRC Nano Master series is quite good, and also very easy to clean because of the coatings they use.

I have some Tiffen and Hoya filters too, and I cannot say the same about them. It is surprising how good one filter can be from another when it comes to cleaning.

 Manzur Fahim's gear list:Manzur Fahim's gear list
Fujifilm GFX 100 Fujifilm GFX 100S Fujifilm GF 110mm F2 Fujifilm GF 23mm F4 Sigma DP2 Merrill +8 more
highdesertmesa
highdesertmesa Senior Member • Posts: 1,233
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

Painter19 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

highdesertmesa wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

The knurling on the Breakthrough filters is also a cut above that on others. It's much easier to get leverage on the Breakthrough filters.

No problem using them with Fujinon gf lens hoods?

None that I've noticed.

In comparing the Breakthrough and Zeiss T* UV protective lenses, one difference in their respective transmission curves caught my eye. The Zeiss T* seems to abruptly cut off light below about 405 nm whereas the Breakthrough (depending on how the part of the curve not shown actually is) UV protective lens looks like it may transmit light down to 350 nm,

Zeiss T* Protective Lens

Breakthrough UV2 Protective Lens

or so. These are screenshots of graphs from the their respective websites . I’ll try to include them here. Don’t know if this would have a discernible effect on photos?

If it did matter, it should only matter for film. Digital cameras have a UV+IR cut filter over the sensor, meaning all the UV that the manufacturer decided needed to be blocked is already being blocked. This is why B+W sells a “clear” protective filter in addition to UV. Doesn’t make much difference either way.

I’m suspecting it doesn’t matter, but am still wondering. I’m wondering more about loss from excessive lower bandwidth filtration . For example if Fujifilm or other camera manufacturer begins their UV sensor filtration at 200 or 250nm could something be lost in the photos by excluding the 200/250nm - 405nm light? I have no idea just a novice wondering. Of course if the camera sensor filtration already blocks that part of the spectrum it couldn’t matter. When i get a chance I’ll try and find out where the in-camera UV filtration begins for the 50s II.

GF lenses on GFX sensors have very little response at wavelengths shorter than 380 nm.

Great, so from the graphs provided the Breakthrough UV2 would only be adding the 380-405nm part of the spectrum as opposed to the Zeiss T* . Probably imperceptible in photos?

Even if you compare no filter to using the Zeiss T* UV, you won't be able to see any differences related to UV light – on any current digital camera.

OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

To return to B+W for a second. Did your testing showing some loss of corner sharpness using B+W protective lenses include their clear protective lenses?

I was using only the Clear MRC Nano. Never owned (that I recall) a B+W UV.

Thanks for that, and for the wealth of great information you’ve given me.

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?
1

Manzur Fahim wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

Hello again, I’ve gotten so much helpful info here recently I’m hoping to hear the thoughts of others on filters for the Fujinon gf 32-64mm f4, and gf 100-200mm lenses I have to use with my Fujifilm 50s II .

I had in mind UV filters for each lens to use as lens protectors . I’m also thinking about a ND filter or 2 or 3? for each lens, and perhaps a polarizer? I don’t know if a filter holder that I could use on both lenses, or separate sets of screw-in filters for each lens would be best? I’m also wondering if the front lens caps for each lens will fit over screw-in filters like the UV filter?

Aside from those questions I’d appreciate any recommendations as to specific brands, or model #’s of filters . Thanks for any thoughts. I’ll just add I’ll be shooting landscape mostly . A good amount of that will be in the desert, lots of skies, some surf on occasion, some shooting in snow, etc..

I only use UV filters as sort of a protector filter. My choice of brand is B+W. Their MRC Nano Master series is quite good, and also very easy to clean because of the coatings they use.

I have some Tiffen and Hoya filters too, and I cannot say the same about them. It is surprising how good one filter can be from another when it comes to cleaning.

That’s helpful. Thanks for sharing your experience.

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

highdesertmesa wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

highdesertmesa wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

The knurling on the Breakthrough filters is also a cut above that on others. It's much easier to get leverage on the Breakthrough filters.

No problem using them with Fujinon gf lens hoods?

None that I've noticed.

In comparing the Breakthrough and Zeiss T* UV protective lenses, one difference in their respective transmission curves caught my eye. The Zeiss T* seems to abruptly cut off light below about 405 nm whereas the Breakthrough (depending on how the part of the curve not shown actually is) UV protective lens looks like it may transmit light down to 350 nm,

Zeiss T* Protective Lens

Breakthrough UV2 Protective Lens

or so. These are screenshots of graphs from the their respective websites . I’ll try to include them here. Don’t know if this would have a discernible effect on photos?

If it did matter, it should only matter for film. Digital cameras have a UV+IR cut filter over the sensor, meaning all the UV that the manufacturer decided needed to be blocked is already being blocked. This is why B+W sells a “clear” protective filter in addition to UV. Doesn’t make much difference either way.

I’m suspecting it doesn’t matter, but am still wondering. I’m wondering more about loss from excessive lower bandwidth filtration . For example if Fujifilm or other camera manufacturer begins their UV sensor filtration at 200 or 250nm could something be lost in the photos by excluding the 200/250nm - 405nm light? I have no idea just a novice wondering. Of course if the camera sensor filtration already blocks that part of the spectrum it couldn’t matter. When i get a chance I’ll try and find out where the in-camera UV filtration begins for the 50s II.

GF lenses on GFX sensors have very little response at wavelengths shorter than 380 nm.

Great, so from the graphs provided the Breakthrough UV2 would only be adding the 380-405nm part of the spectrum as opposed to the Zeiss T* . Probably imperceptible in photos?

Even if you compare no filter to using the Zeiss T* UV, you won't be able to see any differences related to UV light – on any current digital camera.

Good to hear!

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
NotASpeckOfCereal Senior Member • Posts: 2,190
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

Painter19 wrote:

I had in mind UV filters for each lens to use as lens protectors . I’m also thinking about a ND filter or 2 or 3? for each lens, and perhaps a polarizer?

You've got some good recommendations, but I didn't see a mention of step-rings.

Of course if you want UV filters for protection, you'll get one for each lens, but when it comes to ND filters (or any other filters except the UVs), you should be able to get by with a single set at the largest size (82mm works for a collection of GF lenses) and then use step-rings to use them on lenses with a filter size smaller than the largest (such as a 82mm to 72mm, 82mm to 67mm, 82mm to 58mm, etc.)

Chris

 NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list:NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D850 Fujifilm GFX 100S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +16 more
JimKasson
MOD JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 41,687
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

NotASpeckOfCereal wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

I had in mind UV filters for each lens to use as lens protectors . I’m also thinking about a ND filter or 2 or 3? for each lens, and perhaps a polarizer?

You've got some good recommendations, but I didn't see a mention of step-rings.

Of course if you want UV filters for protection, you'll get one for each lens, but when it comes to ND filters (or any other filters except the UVs), you should be able to get by with a single set at the largest size (82mm works for a collection of GF lenses) and then use step-rings to use them on lenses with a filter size smaller than the largest (such as a 82mm to 72mm, 82mm to 67mm, 82mm to 58mm, etc.)

Step up rings are great, but they are incompatible with using the GF lens hoods.

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Leica Q2 Monochrom Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Nikon Z9 Hasselblad X2D 100c +1 more
OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

NotASpeckOfCereal wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

I had in mind UV filters for each lens to use as lens protectors . I’m also thinking about a ND filter or 2 or 3? for each lens, and perhaps a polarizer?

You've got some good recommendations, but I didn't see a mention of step-rings.

Of course if you want UV filters for protection, you'll get one for each lens, but when it comes to ND filters (or any other filters except the UVs), you should be able to get by with a single set at the largest size (82mm works for a collection of GF lenses) and then use step-rings to use them on lenses with a filter size smaller than the largest (such as a 82mm to 72mm, 82mm to 67mm, 82mm to 58mm, etc.)

Chris

Thanks, Chris. I’m not sure how, or if,  I’ll be using ND filters. I have a polarizer for one lens fairly soon, and then if I find it useful another for my other lens. I’m not at this point thinking of increasing my exposure times, but there’s a lot for me to learn about what ND filters can do.  - Jack

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

JimKasson wrote:

NotASpeckOfCereal wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

I had in mind UV filters for each lens to use as lens protectors . I’m also thinking about a ND filter or 2 or 3? for each lens, and perhaps a polarizer?

You've got some good recommendations, but I didn't see a mention of step-rings.

Of course if you want UV filters for protection, you'll get one for each lens, but when it comes to ND filters (or any other filters except the UVs), you should be able to get by with a single set at the largest size (82mm works for a collection of GF lenses) and then use step-rings to use them on lenses with a filter size smaller than the largest (such as a 82mm to 72mm, 82mm to 67mm, 82mm to 58mm, etc.)

Step up rings are great, but they are incompatible with using the GF lens hoods.

Thanks for that, Jim. i remember you mentioning that earlier.  If I do wind up using ND filters I’m thinking to buy screw-in filters for individual lenses. - Jack

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
highdesertmesa
highdesertmesa Senior Member • Posts: 1,233
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

Painter19 wrote:

NotASpeckOfCereal wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

I had in mind UV filters for each lens to use as lens protectors . I’m also thinking about a ND filter or 2 or 3? for each lens, and perhaps a polarizer?

You've got some good recommendations, but I didn't see a mention of step-rings.

Of course if you want UV filters for protection, you'll get one for each lens, but when it comes to ND filters (or any other filters except the UVs), you should be able to get by with a single set at the largest size (82mm works for a collection of GF lenses) and then use step-rings to use them on lenses with a filter size smaller than the largest (such as a 82mm to 72mm, 82mm to 67mm, 82mm to 58mm, etc.)

Chris

Thanks, Chris. I’m not sure how, or if, I’ll be using ND filters. I have a polarizer for one lens fairly soon, and then if I find it useful another for my other lens. I’m not at this point thinking of increasing my exposure times, but there’s a lot for me to learn about what ND filters can do. - Jack

Here's a great page that illustrates what you can do with each ND filter type/strength:

https://breakthrough.photography/pages/nd-buying-guide

OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

highdesertmesa wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

NotASpeckOfCereal wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

I had in mind UV filters for each lens to use as lens protectors . I’m also thinking about a ND filter or 2 or 3? for each lens, and perhaps a polarizer?

You've got some good recommendations, but I didn't see a mention of step-rings.

Of course if you want UV filters for protection, you'll get one for each lens, but when it comes to ND filters (or any other filters except the UVs), you should be able to get by with a single set at the largest size (82mm works for a collection of GF lenses) and then use step-rings to use them on lenses with a filter size smaller than the largest (such as a 82mm to 72mm, 82mm to 67mm, 82mm to 58mm, etc.)

Chris

Thanks, Chris. I’m not sure how, or if, I’ll be using ND filters. I have a polarizer for one lens fairly soon, and then if I find it useful another for my other lens. I’m not at this point thinking of increasing my exposure times, but there’s a lot for me to learn about what ND filters can do. - Jack

Here's a great page that illustrates what you can do with each ND filter type/strength:

https://breakthrough.photography/pages/nd-buying-guide

Thanks.

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

highdesertmesa wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

highdesertmesa wrote:

Of the protective filters I've used over the years on GF and other lenses (Canon RF, Leica M):

Breakthrough – Top quality. Never buy from their "official" Amazon store. I got two filters in a row that had been replaced – one was a fake and another was a different brand filter entirely. Always order direct from their website, and you may have to wait months for some filters types and sizes to come back into stock.

Zeiss T* UV – same quality as breakthrough but with aluminum rings instead of brass. I prefer brass, but I like the T* coating so I use them almost exclusively

B+W MRC Nano – I stopped using these as I confirmed that for some lenses they could have a negative impact on corner performance versus no filter or versus the Zeiss T* UV filter. These were genuine B+W filters from Adorama and B&H purchased over different time periods, so I ruled out it being a bad batch. I have no idea why – perhaps the nano coating can do strange things to the light ray angles with some lenses. I doubt it's because of the glass quality itself. In any case, I stopped using them completely as I didn't want to have to test every lens with them.

Leica UV – Not that any sane person would use these, but since I'm not sane, I've bought them for my Leica M lenses before. They use aluminum rings that can get easily stuck/jammed (versus Zeiss UV's aluminum rings which just tend to never get super tight). I have had these negatively impact corner performance on some Leica M lenses.

Like others, I have to use protective filters due to the environments I shoot in.

For polarization for digital cameras, I use Heliopan linear polarizers. No need to use circular polarizers and have to deal with the strange angles of darkening you can get. With a linear filter, you simply are dialing in the strength of the effect by rotating the filter.

To return to B+W for a second. Did your testing showing some loss of corner sharpness using B+W protective lenses include their clear protective lenses?

I was using only the Clear MRC Nano. Never owned (that I recall) a B+W UV.

I’ve gotten so much great information in this thread from You, and Jim and others that I’m just going to take a few days to go through it and digest it all. One thing I want to be clearer on is whether to go for a clear protective lens, or a UV protective one.

My gf50s II is a digital camera,, and has been pointed out, virtually all digital cameras today come with their own UV protection for their sensors and other(?) parts. Jim mentioned that there is filtration screening light below 380 nm in my system effectively eliminating almost all of the UV part of the spectrum. The Breakthrough UV protective lens has it appears a similar  transmission curve. The Zeiss T* screen wavelengths below 405 nm or so with a somewhat more abrupt transmission curve. Is the UV filtration of UV protective lenses generally fully duplicative of my camera system’s own UV filtration?

The various makers of UV protective lenses tout their products as reducing haze, revealing more detail, enhancing color saturation maybe and seem to mostly attribute that to their lense's UV filtering. They provide lots of A/B image comparisons They do mention their lens coating's anti-reflective properties as well, but I’m still left with the impression their UV filtering is doing a lot of the haze removal.

I’m a guy who welcomes some ( “some" being the operative word) limited haze reduction, but don’t want overly high contrast images, with overly saturated darks , and overly saturated colors. The protective lens designers are making certain aesthetic decisions when shaping their lense's transmission curves and anti-reflective properties. I can imagine also that their lenses might look clear as one looks through them , but it’s their effect on photographs that counts.

Guess I’m looking for a “clear” protective lens, or a not overly contrasty UV one that allows some haze in the resulting images. Maybe even an easier to remove one like Breakthrough as I might need to take it off a lot ?!

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
JimKasson
MOD JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 41,687
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

Painter19 wrote:

I’ve gotten so much great information in this thread from You, and Jim and others that I’m just going to take a few days to go through it and digest it all. One thing I want to be clearer on is whether to go for a clear protective lens, or a UV protective one.

My gf50s II is a digital camera,, and has been pointed out, virtually all digital cameras today come with their own UV protection for their sensors and other(?) parts. Jim mentioned that there is filtration screening light below 380 nm in my system effectively eliminating almost all of the UV part of the spectrum. The Breakthrough UV protective lens has it appears a similar transmission curve. The Zeiss T* screen wavelengths below 405 nm or so with a somewhat more abrupt transmission curve. Is the UV filtration of UV protective lenses generally fully duplicative of my camera system’s own UV filtration?

Yes.

The various makers of UV protective lenses tout their products as reducing haze, revealing more detail, enhancing color saturation maybe and seem to mostly attribute that to their lense's UV filtering. They provide lots of A/B image comparisons They do mention their lens coating's anti-reflective properties as well, but I’m still left with the impression their UV filtering is doing a lot of the haze removal.

They are selling filters.

I’m a guy who welcomes some ( “some" being the operative word) limited haze reduction, but don’t want overly high contrast images, with overly saturated darks , and overly saturated colors. The protective lens designers are making certain aesthetic decisions when shaping their lense's transmission curves and anti-reflective properties. I can imagine also that their lenses might look clear as one looks through them , but it’s their effect on photographs that counts.

Guess I’m looking for a “clear” protective lens, or a not overly contrasty UV one that allows some haze in the resulting images. Maybe even an easier to remove one like Breakthrough as I might need to take it off a lot ?!

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Leica Q2 Monochrom Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Nikon Z9 Hasselblad X2D 100c +1 more
petreluk Senior Member • Posts: 1,735
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

highdesertmesa wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

petreluk wrote:

Fuji make their own protective filters. I use those.

Oh really? I was wondering about that. I’ve looked in the past but couldn't find anything.

Ok, thanks! I found them online on the Fujifilm site and elsewhere. Can you please give me your thoughts about them ?

I had an entire set of the Fujifilm brand protective filters on all my GF lenses at one time. Only filter I have ever had lose the coating in spots from casual use. Optically they were similar to the B+W with occasional impact to corner performance. At some point I tossed all of them in the trash and switched to Zeiss.

Bad luck. Mine are all still fine and I’m not seeing a performance hit though I guess time will tell.

 petreluk's gear list:petreluk's gear list
Fujifilm GFX 50S II Sony a7 IV Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 70-200 F4 Sony FE 24-105mm F4 +2 more
OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

JimKasson wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

I’ve gotten so much great information in this thread from You, and Jim and others that I’m just going to take a few days to go through it and digest it all. One thing I want to be clearer on is whether to go for a clear protective lens, or a UV protective one.

My gf50s II is a digital camera,, and has been pointed out, virtually all digital cameras today come with their own UV protection for their sensors and other(?) parts. Jim mentioned that there is filtration screening light below 380 nm in my system effectively eliminating almost all of the UV part of the spectrum. The Breakthrough UV protective lens has it appears a similar transmission curve. The Zeiss T* screen wavelengths below 405 nm or so with a somewhat more abrupt transmission curve. Is the UV filtration of UV protective lenses generally fully duplicative of my camera system’s own UV filtration?

Yes.

The various makers of UV protective lenses tout their products as reducing haze, revealing more detail, enhancing color saturation maybe and seem to mostly attribute that to their lense's UV filtering. They provide lots of A/B image comparisons They do mention their lens coating's anti-reflective properties as well, but I’m still left with the impression their UV filtering is doing a lot of the haze removal.

They are selling filters.

I’m a guy who welcomes some ( “some" being the operative word) limited haze reduction, but don’t want overly high contrast images, with overly saturated darks , and overly saturated colors. The protective lens designers are making certain aesthetic decisions when shaping their lense's transmission curves and anti-reflective properties. I can imagine also that their lenses might look clear as one looks through them , but it’s their effect on photographs that counts.

Guess I’m looking for a “clear” protective lens, or a not overly contrasty UV one that allows some haze in the resulting images. Maybe even an easier to remove one like Breakthrough as I might need to take it off a lot ?!

Thanks, Jim I think you said you’re not a fan of protective filters(?) I can certainly see why one would avoid using them. I still would like the protection , but will try and find a protective lens without lens coatings that "overly clarify" images to my aesthetic or taste. Given the modern digital camera’s internal UV filtration, it seems the a UV protective lens reducing haze, increasing contrast and detail, etc. when used with such a camera is mainly doing so through the anti-reflective properties of its’ lens coatings not its’ UV filtration . Some amount of anti-reflection is needed to to reduce possible additional lens flare from the protective lens I guess, and then there are the ease of cleaning and scratch protection attributes. So, UV or clear protective I’ll try and shop for a protective lens that produces photos closest to the camera’s naked lens, and is of otherwise good quality.

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
JimKasson
MOD JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 41,687
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

Painter19 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

I’ve gotten so much great information in this thread from You, and Jim and others that I’m just going to take a few days to go through it and digest it all. One thing I want to be clearer on is whether to go for a clear protective lens, or a UV protective one.

My gf50s II is a digital camera,, and has been pointed out, virtually all digital cameras today come with their own UV protection for their sensors and other(?) parts. Jim mentioned that there is filtration screening light below 380 nm in my system effectively eliminating almost all of the UV part of the spectrum. The Breakthrough UV protective lens has it appears a similar transmission curve. The Zeiss T* screen wavelengths below 405 nm or so with a somewhat more abrupt transmission curve. Is the UV filtration of UV protective lenses generally fully duplicative of my camera system’s own UV filtration?

Yes.

The various makers of UV protective lenses tout their products as reducing haze, revealing more detail, enhancing color saturation maybe and seem to mostly attribute that to their lense's UV filtering. They provide lots of A/B image comparisons They do mention their lens coating's anti-reflective properties as well, but I’m still left with the impression their UV filtering is doing a lot of the haze removal.

They are selling filters.

I’m a guy who welcomes some ( “some" being the operative word) limited haze reduction, but don’t want overly high contrast images, with overly saturated darks , and overly saturated colors. The protective lens designers are making certain aesthetic decisions when shaping their lense's transmission curves and anti-reflective properties. I can imagine also that their lenses might look clear as one looks through them , but it’s their effect on photographs that counts.

Guess I’m looking for a “clear” protective lens, or a not overly contrasty UV one that allows some haze in the resulting images. Maybe even an easier to remove one like Breakthrough as I might need to take it off a lot ?!

Thanks, Jim I think you said you’re not a fan of protective filters(?) I can certainly see why one would avoid using them. I still would like the protection , but will try and find a protective lens without lens coatings that "overly clarify" images to my aesthetic or taste.

The purpose of the coatings is not to clarify the images, but to prevent visible reflections. You don't have to worry about getting coatings that are "too clear".

Given the modern digital camera’s internal UV filtration, it seems the a UV protective lens reducing haze, increasing contrast and detail, etc. when used with such a camera is mainly doing so through the anti-reflective properties of its’ lens coatings not its’ UV filtration .

All the coatings on a filter can do is reduce reflections from the filter itself. It can make the lens clearer than it is at the beginning.

Some amount of anti-reflection is needed to to reduce possible additional lens flare from the protective lens I guess, and then there are the ease of cleaning and scratch protection attributes. So, UV or clear protective I’ll try and shop for a protective lens that produces photos closest to the camera’s naked lens, and is of otherwise good quality.

Then use a coated clear filter.

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Leica Q2 Monochrom Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Nikon Z9 Hasselblad X2D 100c +1 more
OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

JimKasson wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

I’ve gotten so much great information in this thread from You, and Jim and others that I’m just going to take a few days to go through it and digest it all. One thing I want to be clearer on is whether to go for a clear protective lens, or a UV protective one.

My gf50s II is a digital camera,, and has been pointed out, virtually all digital cameras today come with their own UV protection for their sensors and other(?) parts. Jim mentioned that there is filtration screening light below 380 nm in my system effectively eliminating almost all of the UV part of the spectrum. The Breakthrough UV protective lens has it appears a similar transmission curve. The Zeiss T* screen wavelengths below 405 nm or so with a somewhat more abrupt transmission curve. Is the UV filtration of UV protective lenses generally fully duplicative of my camera system’s own UV filtration?

Yes.

The various makers of UV protective lenses tout their products as reducing haze, revealing more detail, enhancing color saturation maybe and seem to mostly attribute that to their lense's UV filtering. They provide lots of A/B image comparisons They do mention their lens coating's anti-reflective properties as well, but I’m still left with the impression their UV filtering is doing a lot of the haze removal.

They are selling filters.

I’m a guy who welcomes some ( “some" being the operative word) limited haze reduction, but don’t want overly high contrast images, with overly saturated darks , and overly saturated colors. The protective lens designers are making certain aesthetic decisions when shaping their lense's transmission curves and anti-reflective properties. I can imagine also that their lenses might look clear as one looks through them , but it’s their effect on photographs that counts.

Guess I’m looking for a “clear” protective lens, or a not overly contrasty UV one that allows some haze in the resulting images. Maybe even an easier to remove one like Breakthrough as I might need to take it off a lot ?!

Thanks, Jim I think you said you’re not a fan of protective filters(?) I can certainly see why one would avoid using them. I still would like the protection , but will try and find a protective lens without lens coatings that "overly clarify" images to my aesthetic or taste.

The purpose of the coatings is not to clarify the images, but to prevent visible reflections. You don't have to worry about getting coatings that are "too clear".

Given the modern digital camera’s internal UV filtration, it seems the a UV protective lens reducing haze, increasing contrast and detail, etc. when used with such a camera is mainly doing so through the anti-reflective properties of its’ lens coatings not its’ UV filtration .

All the coatings on a filter can do is reduce reflections from the filter itself. It can make the lens clearer than it is at the beginning.

Some amount of anti-reflection is needed to to reduce possible additional lens flare from the protective lens I guess, and then there are the ease of cleaning and scratch protection attributes. So, UV or clear protective I’ll try and shop for a protective lens that produces photos closest to the camera’s naked lens, and is of otherwise good quality.

Then use a coated clear filter.

Yes, thanks.  I’ll try a find one of those first, and still look at some UV protective lenses as well. I’ll try and look closely hopefully at a number of A/B naked camera lens vs with protective lens image comparisons, and listen to testimonials on that topic to inform my choice.

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
JimKasson
MOD JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 41,687
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

Painter19 wrote:

Yes, thanks. I’ll try a find one of those first, and still look at some UV protective lenses as well. I’ll try and look closely hopefully at a number of A/B naked camera lens vs with protective lens image comparisons, and listen to testimonials on that topic to inform my choice.

You could do something like this test:

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/flare-from-3-uv-filters/

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Leica Q2 Monochrom Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Nikon Z9 Hasselblad X2D 100c +1 more
OP Painter19 Contributing Member • Posts: 650
Re: Filter recommendations for Fujinon GF lenses?

JimKasson wrote:

Painter19 wrote:

Yes, thanks. I’ll try a find one of those first, and still look at some UV protective lenses as well. I’ll try and look closely hopefully at a number of A/B naked camera lens vs with protective lens image comparisons, and listen to testimonials on that topic to inform my choice.

You could do something like this test:

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/flare-from-3-uv-filters/

Very interesting. Thanks for the link, and for your work. I’m not such a patient, or systematic lab person, but I’m grateful for those who are ! i’m slowly sliding towards no protective lens, or maybe to have one I use only in rougher conditions. If i can find one I’m happy to leave on most of the time or almost always that will be great. I’ll keep researching as best I can on line. It’s all I have time for right now.

 Painter19's gear list:Painter19's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX10 IV
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads