Nikon 35mm f/1.8 DX Lens

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Michael, Jun 15, 2011.

  1. Michael

    Michael Guest

    Thanks to all who answered my query about this lens.
    Amazon has it in stock for $199 with free shipping and a Tiffen UV
    filter, so I ordered it and expect it in about 10 days (free shipping
    on Amazon is kind of slow) and will report on it in due time.
     
    Michael, Jun 15, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Michael

    Mike Guest

    Enjoy the lens.

    Mike
     
    Mike, Jun 15, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Michael

    Alan Browne Guest

    I find Amazon systematically promise long delivery times and deliver
    better than promised when free shipping is selected and they are the
    vendor. (Buying from others via Amazon has mixed results).
     
    Alan Browne, Jun 15, 2011
    #3
  4. []
    Yes, it's better than promising tomorrow and the good haven't arrived a
    week later! Agreed on 3rd-party vendors (at least in the UK).

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jun 15, 2011
    #4
  5. Michael

    RichA Guest

    You can get a good Hoya or B&W filter to replace the Tiffen on Ebay
    for about $20.00 as well. The one they supply with it might not even
    be coated. Check it once you get it.
     
    RichA, Jun 15, 2011
    #5
  6. At least in the past, Tiffen filters were "bottom of the barrel",
    being uncoated and tending to self-fog within a couple of months
    to the point that using them without first cleaning them was
    similar to using a diffusion filter. They also have unusually
    thick rims that can cause vignetting with some lenses. Ugh...
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Jun 15, 2011
    #6
  7. Michael

    Michael Guest

    I will but frankly I don't often use UV filters.
     
    Michael, Jun 16, 2011
    #7
  8. Michael

    Michael Guest

    Thank you. i am watching several auctions for USED versons of this lens
    on ebay and ALL of them that closed in the last day have been for
    substantially MORE than Amazon's price new, and most add shipping
    charges. Some people will buy anything at auction. To buy that lens
    used without checking the new price on B&H, Adorama and Amazon first is
    lunacy.
     
    Michael, Jun 16, 2011
    #8
  9. Michael

    PeterN Guest

    Be creative with your new lens. You will probably see that the shipping
    is not as slow as you think. the say ten days, but it usually is much
    faster.
     
    PeterN, Jun 16, 2011
    #9
  10. Michael

    PeterN Guest

    PeterN, Jun 16, 2011
    #10
  11. I have ***NEVER*** seen one honest demonstration of a UV
    filter "cutting through haze". Most "demonstrations" are
    faked by filter manufacturers to sell the filter, although
    some will give a yellow tint to the image which reduces
    apparent blue a tad. What UV filters do, though, is protect
    the lens front surface from dust, cleaning scratches,
    accidents, oily finger marks (which can be hard to remove,
    and which WILL affect the image), etc. A *GOOD* UV filter
    will have NO ill effect on the performance of a lens, and
    it can be removed for cleaning, washing, or replacement.
     
    David Ruether, Jun 16, 2011
    #11
  12. Michael

    PeterN Guest

    The only files I use are polarizeers, my home made variable neutral
    density filter and my home made variable haze increasing filter.

    As for filter protection, the effectiveness is up top the user.
     
    PeterN, Jun 16, 2011
    #12
  13. I have seen such a thing using B&W film on a view camera
    with a simple (Angulon, not "Super Angulon") lens. It
    was about half the difference of using a yellow filter.

    But color film today, and all color digital, simply
    does not detect UV.

    Doug McDonald
     
    Doug McDonald, Jun 16, 2011
    #13
  14. I think your experience has another possible explanation:
    early lenses, which also had few elements (the Angulon
    had four, as I recall) passed considerable UV (not helped
    by the early film sensitivity to UV...). The two together
    could result in some "gawd-aweful" spilling of skies over
    and around buildings and trees shot in overcast light. This
    does not happen with modern lens glass and multi-element
    design or with modern films and sensors, as you noted. It
    is actually difficult now to shoot with UV illumination. ;-)
    As it is, a yellow filter weaker than a dark yellow one
    had little effect on color-related tonal balance, and I
    used to be amused by the emphasis given for using a medium
    or light yellow filter on an overcast day let alone on a
    clear, sunny day (I preferred dark yellow, orange, or red
    with B&W...;-). But, now what to do with my large collection
    of filters? 8^(
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Jun 16, 2011
    #14
  15. Michael

    PeterN Guest

    I have certainly seen haze interference on digital shots. Many of which
    can be easily cleared up by using various post processing techniques.
    All I know is what works.
     
    PeterN, Jun 16, 2011
    #15
  16. But, the question is, Was the haze really there or not...?
    If yes, a UV filter will do nothing to remove it.
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Jun 17, 2011
    #16
  17. Michael

    PeterN Guest

    While I make no pretensions about expertise, I would think that haze
    which is fog or smog would not be removable with a UV filter. However, I
    do think a haze effect caused by reflections of fog would be removable
    with a filter. I could be wrong, though.
     
    PeterN, Jun 17, 2011
    #17
  18. Michael

    Rich Guest

    I did some tests. There is a much greater chance of experiencing
    reflections in an image unless coatings are top-notch. Of course in
    situations where reflections might be likely, no filter is better, but
    not always practical.
     
    Rich, Jun 17, 2011
    #18
  19. Neither have I.

    I have seen some interesting examples of IR filters cutting through fog,
    though. RichA posted a link to one here some time ago that was very
    impressive. But UV "haze" filters, phooey.
    In about 60 years of photography I have never once used a filter "to protect
    the lens" and have never suffered any lens damage as a result. I have been
    reasonably careful with my cameras. And I do think a proper lens hood offers
    useful protection, especially on those lenses that have the front element
    right up at the very front.
     
    Neil Harrington, Jun 17, 2011
    #19
  20. You have been lucky (not that damage is likely to happen often,
    and some lenses, such as fisheyes and some superwides, cannot
    be fitted with front filters anyway). Someone did grab at my
    camera once, though, damaging the filter although it had a shade
    on it. I have several lenses I could not easily replace that I
    would not want to risk...
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Jun 17, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.