addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

Photography Meetup Group Message Board The Photography Meet Up Group Discussion Forum › Camera Lenses - are Canon and Nikon worth the extra money?

Camera Lenses - are Canon and Nikon worth the extra money?

A former member
Post #: 10
I am with Alfredo on the L lens.
I don't use the lens without a uv filter.
Please see the comparisons in image quality for lens with uv filter and without uv filter

I have 77mm uv filter from B+W which is used on various 67 - 77mm lens diameters by using various adapters. So I just bought one largest uv filter instead of buying one filter for every lens.
Ryan E.
user 23023011
Madison, WI
Post #: 71
Yes I realize all have their preferences & views which is good. Not using a UV is just mine. My logic is, that if you were to stack high quality UV filters on top of one another, you will see degradation at some point. Not that anyone would do this, but it just lends to the theory of even one causing degradation even if it is hardly noticeable at all. I do suggest that if anyone is worried about damaging the front element to then by all means, use a UV filter. That said, I think any filter has can have the most minute degradation on IQ, but depending on what the filter can do for me aesthetically, I will use them. Polarizers, neutral density & split neutral density being the ones I use often for this reason. To me UV does nothing but lessen the chance of front element damage, but I am so cautious with my gear, that it is a risk I am willing to take. Again, all just my opinion.

As for debris or keys, yes I should have clarified that I do put one on if I am to be on a beach or go to a few of the color run events the group has been to. Then the protection of the UV outweighs the possibility of IQ issues. When the lens is in my bag, I always have the caps on as everyone should IMO. This way there is no chance of keys or whatever scratching the elements. Having a good bag with dedicated lens compartment is a good idea as well for protecting the overall lens.

Glad to see input & resources coming in from many members.
A former member
Post #: 2
I have no problems using Tamrons, Sigmas or Tokinas over Nikon. I do have nikon glass also. I get whats available and fits my uses and budget. When I was looking for a 12-24, I couldnt find a USED Nikon 12-24 for a reasonable price. Picked up a Tokina 12-24 and its a great lens. Got to borrow a nikon 12-24 to compare and with the exception that the Tokina doesnt have VR, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference with picture quality.

BTW Tamron makes some of Nikon kit lenses (pretty sure some canons also).
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy