Andrew Fildes wrote:
> Nevertheless and notwithstanding - there are serious people who are
> happy to put things like $300 Schneider centre grad. filters in front
> of Hologons and X-pan 30mm's and the like. There's filters and
> filters. Generally multi-coated B+W, Heliopan and Schneider
> (virtually the same company) UV 010 MRC in their heavy brass rings
> are a very different proposition to Whocares "the store said I needed
> it" made in Cambodia haze filters (they're not lying, they DO create
> a serious haze in your pix).
>
And yet.... If the image is going through a digital process, effects
like center grad may be done, at a lot less cost and with more control
and flexibility, without a filter. Circular grads are a snap in PS.
Gary claimed that even examples of those Germanic-ly perfect filters had
been found that failed the star test.
As I recently posted, all flat filters have at least some image
degrading effect as a matter of optical physics.
It is theoretically possible to design a filter for any given prime lens
that doesn't suffer from that problem, but then it's really a special
lens with zero focal length effect and no abberations. And so expensive
you would need a filter for it in dangerous conditions. :-)
Catch xx, the filter costs more than the lens.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|