Are these mostly for film cameras and not digital, if I'm using mostly for protection, would not the cheaper Tiffens suffice, whats the difference?
211094
In general a color conversion (warm or cooling) filter is just that regardless of camera or lens it is placed in front of. I sometimes use it when taking shots of sunsets/sunrises with my D7000. If you want a lens strictly for protection then get the best quality crystal clear lens possible-no distortion or color shift at all. If you are relatively careful a protection lens will not be necessary. Remember you will need one for each size diameter lens you own unless you buy step up/down rings. Most actual lenses are recessed (not all) so scratching it rare.
270526
Good question, and a controversial topic. Lots of discussion on various forums. For imaging, no, it isn't needed. For protection, maybe. I use filters to protect my lenses. They're cheaper to replace. Or, they would be, but I've never damaged a filter, much less a lens. I still use them, and have since my old 35 mm film days (that's 35 years of not damaging the end of a lens, including a couple of Himalayan treks). The hood also protects the glass, and many consider that adequate. I just can't get past the relative cost to replace should my clumsiness finally break through, so to speak.
1915590
I only needed them for negatives. They work really well for for that but I'd only trust a professional with the 8mm movies.
790510
Dust is an issue if you plan to change lense often. I have a XTi, despite the dust cleaning system I don't plan to remove the lens much. Dust is a real problem for digital as the camera back never gets replaced unlike film. Also, D80 is $200 more than XTi. Nikon lenses are usually more expensive. Quality wise, i think, they are fairly equivalent. Your skills will probably make more difference than the equipment.
1177557
Probably. They are generic cards for Nikon digital SLR's. They dealin with settings that are best for different types of photography.
1163826
That depends a great deal on what format you're recording them in, (JPG, TIF, or the camera's RAW format, etc.) and at what resolution you're shooting.
1217898
I don'r think that there is a difference. I think the "digital" suggests use with a digital camera.
2031769
I use on a Hasselblad CFV-50 digital back. They last 1/2 day if upswing full time. They last up to a week if I'm taking a few pictures a day.
1995946
No - JPEG and NEF (Nikon RAW). If you want TIFF files for some reason, shoot in NEF and then convert them. This will be a higher quality image than an in-camera conversion would be anyway. Speaking of which, the Nikon NEF &gt; JPEG converter that runs on your PC is better than the one in the camera so I always shoot RAW.
237466
I am not familiar with the Nikon D80 but I will relate to you my experience. I have not used this filter on a Digital camera yet. I have shot lots of B/W IR with film. I used ASA 50 with the focus slightly off as IR is not the same wavelength as what we see. I have shot only B/W on weathered buildings/structures. The results is usually what I am looking for. Now, with digital I just purchases a filter but will not have a chance to use it until late this month in Wyoming and Montana (ghost towns). Bottom line is if you are shooting B/W, set your ASA to 50 and slightly out of focus. I have no experience with color. You may have to do a little experimenting to get what you want. If you want I can send you some of my photos after I get back from my trip. You might also try using a red filter.
1509589
I believe they use the same film since theres only like one type of film available (mini). As for the model numbers, the higher the number the more "advanced" the camera is. http://instax.com/products/camera/
325447
Well, if you're shooting indoor "low light" then there isn't much need for an ND filter. Unless you're also using a flash? It's really great for shooting, say, beaches on really bright day and you wanna open up the aperture in order to blur the background without over exposing your picture.
624644
The short answer is "You get what you pay for." Not all glass is created equal. Less expensive lenses often prove to have inferior glass (greater distortion, higher chromatic dispersion, etc.) If your images don't require the kind of detail that higher priced lenses provide, then go with the less expensive lens.
1004959
I'm not too familiar with those cameras, but as long as it takes compact flash cards and you aren't filming in 4k. I used it with magic lantern to film 4k and it dropped a few frames. If you're shooting 4k I hear Lexar is better
846383
Please be noticed that this kind of Lens filters is intended to protect your valuable camera lens against scratches and similar physical damage.Considering this, I don't think this filter may work as a Water-Resistant protection.Therefore, if you plan to use your digital camera pretty close to liquids/humid weather conditions (rain, waterfalls, fountains, etc.) the best protection you may get is using a camera rain cover.
26494
Dust is an issue if you plan to change lense often. I have a XTi, despite the dust cleaning system I don't plan to remove the lens much. Dust is a real problem for digital as the camera back never gets replaced unlike film.Also, D80 is $200 more than XTi. Nikon lenses are usually more expensive. Quality wise, i think, they are fairly equivalent. Your skills will probably make more difference than the equipment.
1268250
Sorry I can't answer that. I can tell you though that they are durable and I would recommend them. I use them all the time for photo shoots.