My 85mm f/1.8 creates a lot of purple chromatic aberration when shooting wide open (f/1.8). Will this filter help eliminate the purple outlining?
1842953
I tried to duplicate your problem with the B+W filter. I noticed no purple problems with it on but slight fringing w/o.
1794473
Without it being available yet it's hard to say just what exactly will be different quality wise. The new one will improve bokeh out of focus highlights at a price though. You will lose T-Stops (light transmission) For example 1.2 might give you the same light as f1.8-2. This is because the filter is a type of Neutral Density filter. For me I shoot low light and having that extra stop is important. The trade off combined with price just doesn't work. So what's more important to you? Bokeh quality or low light shooting? The 56mm is a fantastic lens in either version. Highly recommended!
1842623
It's the lens. If you shoot wide open you get a beautiful effect in the out of focus areas. You just have to be careful to focus carefully on what you want in focus. The depth of field at f1.2 or f1.4 is very shallow.
2194985
I use sigma filters on all of my lenses and have had no problems with smudging when cleaning. I use a nikon cleaning pen generally when I clean and all of my filters stay spotless.
1565646
I have the original version on a NEX-7. I haven't noticed any purple fringing (chromatic aberration), nor have I gone looking for it. So no comments on that aspect. That aside, to answer your direct question, both the NEX-7 and the A6000 have APS-C size sensors, and E (not FE) lens mounts, so there should be no question that either the original version or the updated version will attach physically, and will have a large enough image circle to fully cover the sensor on either camera.
989896
I couldn't locate my cpl for this reply, but some other (AGFA) filters have as little as one to one-1/2 threads engaged. This is usually enough, providing you rotate the outer ring in the direction that always tightens the filter in the lens. I've never lost one---yet! Appears to be a good filter, though--smooth rotation.
727262
I believe the fish-eye filter merely gives you a fisheye-like distortion. The wideness of the view will depend entirely on the lens you use.
1010451
A high quality filter should not degrade the image quality in any noticeable way. There are multi-coated filters available optimized for lens protection, and if these are not easy to find then a UV filter will work fine. I agree with the previous answer that protecting the front element of the lens is a very most important thing, unless all your work is in a clean dry studio with the camera on a tripod.
1691483
Make sure the filter has a firm, solid rotation feel without being loose or gritty. Scratches that are deep are to be avoided whereas minor scratches won't be noticed unless the coatings are scratched. Also make sure there is absolutely NO damage to the filter ring or threads whatsoever - if it has been dropped while mounted on a lens it could be out-of-round and become stuck on your lens if overtightened. Insist on a photo or two showing any imperfections or just buy new. B+W is my filter of choice.
778320
You need a filter that passes infrared light and blocks much of the visible light or you will just get normal B&W; shots. I've used a Cokin 007 filter, which is equivalent to an 89B. This is a very dark filter; you get more of an IR effect with filters that block more visible light. This is not a true IR film so the effect won't be as extreme, but you can still get some good shots with light leaves and dark skies.
1822084
Yes, I have both. There isn't much point to the Clear UV Haze filter as far as having any positive effect on your photographs. It used to matter with film, but in digital the camera is immune to UV anyway so there is no positive difference in the images captured. On the minus side, adding a filter gives you one more thing that can be smudged or dusty and one more layer of glass to invite flare if you're shooting into bright light or sun. Meanwhile, the circular polarizer has a pretty major effect on photographs, particularly outdoors. It eliminates reflected light in one direction, which enables you to cut glare from water, roads, windows, and sky. There are tradeoffs too; sometimes it makes the sky too deep and unnaturally blue. But you can usually adjust to deal with that. It can also help clouds stand out more if that's what you're trying to do.
2019782
I use a Hoya Green Label (uncoated) 46mm UV filter purely for protection from dirt and "me". I got mine from camerafilters.com for @$10, maybe less. The main concern for me was getting one that I knew would clear the lense tunnel, as no one seemed to know what fit my FZ28 at the time. I've taken hundreds of shots just for comparison, I see no difference in image quality. I now leave it on inside and out. I prefer the uncoated, as they seem easier to clean. (A lenspen works great for the filter and lens)Edit: You do mean F"Z" 35 don't you?? You posted FX35..
917657
Dinosaw,I've used these star filters in astrophotography to highlight bright stars. They don'tadd any distortions at all. Zero chromatic aberration, no vignetting as long as theyare stacked with other filters, and no detectable edge distortions. If you want tocreate highlight effects on bright objects, I highly recommend these filters.Best wishes, Ron Smith
81836
What kind of effect are you looking for? These filters are not designed to make big changes in color, they are to make blues a little bluer, greens a little greener and so on. As an example, if the sky is a lite blue , the 1/2 blue filter can be set to make the sky a slightly more blue. The "UV" filter removes some glare when used in direct sun light, Fluorescent lighting tends to change the color temperature and not in a good way, the use of the "FLD" filter can make the lighting look more like Tungsten lighting. The "CPL" filter is maybe the hardest filter to use, it is hard to see the difference that rotating the dial makes. The "CPL" filter is a "Polarizing" filter, fishermen use "Polarizing Sunglasses to be able to see in to the water and see the fish. The "CPL" filter helps in high glare places like looking thru a window in direct sun light. To see how it works, go to a river or lake and hold the filter up to one eye with one hand and rotate the dial with the other while looking into the water. The star filters require sharp/ strong points of light try setting up Xmas lights around a window or door and view it thru the filter, the number stands for the number of arms that extend out. (star-4 = four arms/ lines, star-6 =6, star-8 =8) The main thing to remember is that the view finder and or monitor on todays digital cameras are small and it is difficult to see the changes these filters make, I use a 26" HD high definition (at least 1080p) monitor using a HDMI cable thru the video out on my Canon Rebel T4i Camera. I hope this helps.
1115402
I don't own that lens, but from some reading around it appears that regular filters are fine; however, I will make note that circular polarizers on a wide angle will produce very strange results due to uneven polarization. That may or may not be a concern depending if you want to use it for creative effect.
88041
Haven't specifically tested that lens, but the filter is built for 82mm thread. If it doesn't cause vignetting on my 16-35mm, there's no reason it should on anything. CJ is right, the glass is quite a bit larger than the ring.
1727075
I had NO problem using the 52mm filters on my Lens.I use a neutral density filter to protect my lens.