-
there seems to be two opposite side to the discussion
..yes there is, and there always has been.
You should probably just try it for yourself (shoot the same things twice, with UV filter and without) and see what differences it makes / if it actually does make a difference.My only advice would be using proper ones with good coatings (as with front elements of the actual lenses, this means less reflections, plus easier to clean).
Never used the cokin ones as that always seemed like a major pain in the ass.
-
Two sides of the argument and both are equally valid.
The key issue is the coating on the lens rather than the technology of the film. AST @tinakino said, try with and without. Personally, if I’m using old lenses I tend to do so without filters because I like how they perform, flaws and all. I confess I do use UV filters for protection on expensive modern digital lenses, even though I know I really don’t need to.
For film, I do use square filter holders for landscape when I need ND grad to retain detail in the sky as well as exposing properly for the foreground. Especially if shooting slide film. Because I have them for that, I also have some strong ND filters for long exposure shots on film and digital. Not Cokin though, I use Formatt Hitech
You are reading a single comment by @lynx and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
salad
IanF
@lynx
Has there been a discussion about using UV/sky/polarising screw on filter on an slr lens for protection. Do the screw on filters increase lens flair? Do modern colour or black and white films need 'help' that a uv or sky filter would give?
Am asking as I have been reading about using screw on filters to protect the lens, as I was told, but there seems to be two opposite side to the discussion.
Do you still use the cokin square filters any more.