Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/07/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Joe Codispoti wrote: > > Ted, > > Use a filter larger than the shade , mount it on an adapted tube to slip > over the integral shade (which is more of a cradle to protect the front > element than a shade). Hi Joe, This wasn't a problem for me on using a UV with the 15 as there is one built into the lens which rotates around with a few colour filters. They are hidden in the lens barrel. I thought maybe it would be interesting what others would do to protect the front element as they seem to worry more about protecting them, than what one might assume, use them all the time. In all my years I've only had a couple of things happen with the front element, one recently with the front element on the 15, there is a very tiny "mark? scratch?" whatever, maybe happened while I had it stuffed in my photo vest pocket during a shoot. In any event yeah you can see it but it doesn't show on any frame even when stopped down as far as it'll go. The other was during a story on arc welders at work and I inadvertently got way tooooooooooooooooo close to a guy working and a spark of hot metal landed on the front element of a 28 mm 2.8 and it burnt a zit right in the glass. I suppose a filter would have helped in this case, but it was caused simply because I was working to close to the welder. Again it never showed in any frames no matter where you focused or how far you stopped down, so I just forgot about it and went on shooting for some years never giving it another thought. I look at filters for protection more as a "mind set" thing rather than reality of protection. Spending the money on them, if you have a dozen lenses becomes very expensive. And in the long run if you're an average every day amateur shooter I find it hard to believe there is great danger to their equipment requiring UV's just for protection. Compared to pros who are on the go 90% of time shooting and don't use them or use them merely for a photographic effect, then remove them. Heck I'd rather use the money to buy film. And yes I do use a filter or two on occasion, polarizer mainly and the odd time a softar if I'm photographing ladies or if I want to enhance a scene in some manner. But UV's are the choice of the shooter and although we, Jim and I stand pretty firm about using them on the newer Leica glass merely for protection, I suppose if a guy or gal wishes to use them for mental comfort, so be it. However, that doesn't mean we'd stand by and let another Leica user who isn't quite as experienced as many others, shouldn't be made aware of the "folly of protection" by placing a UV filter on a $4000 or $5000 lens. And that is our feelings on the subject, just as we see the nefarious challenges that come back of disagreement. Everyone has a point of view, some of ours are well know and can be expected to come as soon as filters show in a topic line. And that being the case, what is the point in challenging each other over something we re-hashed a dozen times in the past. A possible suggestion the next time it comes up and that is tweak the poster directly to the archives. We'd save a bunch of time for picture taking and attempted one upsmanships. ted > > But a better idea would be to ask Jim on the proper use of UV filters. He is > the undisputed expert on UV protection. > > Cheers, > Joe > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ted Grant" <tedgrant@home.com> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2000 7:49 AM > Subject: [Leica] WAS; UV filter and 21mm now 15 mm! > > > > > Here is a question regarding filter use. How would you folks handle this > situation? > > > > You just purchased the Super-Elmar 15 mm f 3.5 lens for a cracking > > $5000.US or higher. The front element stands out like a bulging bug eye > > with funny looking cut away (more cut away) than covers by appearance > > lens shade. How would you attach a filter, of any kind, to protect the > > front element? And not have it interfere with the viewing coverage.? > > > > Seeing we folks always have such "wild and woolly" discussions regarding > > filter use for protection I thought this might give it a slightly > > different twist. Hopefully this will create imaginative answers. And > > please guys and gals, lets not get into semantics, nobody learns from > that! > > ted > >