>It seems there are clear protective filters for DSLRs, which are
> different from UV filter?
Ugh!!!!!!!!!!!! This makes me crazy. The difference between a clear
protective filter and a UV filter is that the UV filter is designed to
remove as much UV as possible, where the clear filter removes UV only as
much as window glass. It is a useless piece of crap.
I do understand that there is a difference between our old filters and ones
designed for digital. (not something just marked digital, like a "digital"
tripod) Apparently, the coatings on the older filters were applied mainly to
the front surface. Now, AR coatings are applied to the back surface as well,
as it is said that sensors are more affected but light bouncing back and
forth between elements and the sensor than in film. Is this true? Don't ask
me, I'm just repeating what I've read in magazines.
On the general subject of filters, I continue to believe that filters should
only be used when a specific effect is required. A protection filter is
needed only when there will be something that you need protecting from, like
sea spray or, in my case, when photographing welders. Don't ask me how I
know this. Otherwise, a plain or UV filter will more likely degrade the
image.
Bill Pearce
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|