Chuck Norcutt stated,
<snip> I'm in general agreement with Brian's reply except that I don't know
why
he thinks a non-multicoated filter might have something to do with
damaging a lens (see point #2 above). Perhaps he meant to say something
else and it just didn't come across the way he meant it.<snip>
In reply to your comments:
My #2. What I was starting to say, but didn't finish too well, was the
damage issue in NOT using a filter, any filter. Many of us start to get
sick at our stomachs when we thing of the possible damage to a lens that
could have possibly been prevented by using a filter. All that money down
the tubes...
<snip> Brian's third set of points (flatness, color, small defects,
mounting)are also considerations <snip>
On my #3, this point I also should have made better, was how plane the
filter is mounted, not ground. I have seen some "off-brand" filters that
were mounted exceptionally poorly. Sometimes it only needed for the filter
mount to be screwed in tighter, other times cross threading of mount was
the culprit. How big a factor this is, I honestly don't know, but I would
think that the "attention to detail" would be an indicator of other
quality.
To expand on this, I recently saw a new, unsold filter in a store with a
BIG fingerprint smack in the middle of a circular polarizer. The
fingerprint was inside the filter sections and could not be cleaned off
without dismantling the entire filter,-(off-brand filter).
Brian
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|