Want a sharper image from your HVX?

Why not use a clear filter instead of UV. I use a clear when i feel there might be an issue of the lens getting hit. I use a Hoya Pro1 digital protector.Multicoated and Designed not to change color balance or performance of your lens.

You need haze elimination. Slap on a polarizer when you need it. I use a B&W. And have no quality degredation.
 
What about Formatt? They have filters that specifically say they've been developed for HD use...?
 
what about the built in filter of the hvx? does that comprimise quality? I usually use it when its very bright, so that i dont bring the fstops high
 
Excellent observation just recorded some footage with and without and found a difference ...recently you wrote an excellent article on your experiences and observations with various 35mm lens adaptors for the HVX 200...can not find the thread would be most appreciative if you could direct me to that thread ...
 
Victor R. Longtin said:
Excellent observation just recorded some footage with and without and found a difference ...recently you wrote an excellent article on your experiences and observations with various 35mm lens adaptors for the HVX 200...can not find the thread would be most appreciative if you could direct me to that thread ...
Click to expand...

Which filter did you use for comparison? Can you post screenshots or footage of it?
 
In my experience even good filters like a multi-coated B+W ND or circular pol can do bad things on zoom lenses - even when it's just on a one-chip SD camcorder. Zoom in full range and the picture will go really bad. If you keep the zoom to half or 3/4 then you won't notice much.

Yesterday I shot with a Sony DXC D30, Canon 9-162mm 18x lens and used a Tiffen circular polarizer on some shots (who the hell bought a circular pol for this cam anyways? It doesn't even have auto focus...). If you zoom in more than about 10x then you can definitely see the image go bad. In 18x zoom it's so bad that sharp lines are doubled and totally washed out.

From what I've seen, I'd never use filters except the built-in NDs unless I really need them for a certain effect.
 
Hey people,

What's your take on the Tamron 82 mm UV/Haze Filter. It was recommended to me by my retailer and I have never compared. I was told they are similar (or made by) Hoya.

Thanx.
 
Can't give an opinion on the Tamron, but just thought I'd share the results of my tests using my newly received 82mm Formatt UV Clear.

I shot with and without the UV, at the wide and long ends of the lens, and I really can't notice any difference. I'm looking at the footage on a Mac 23" widescreen, so I'm assuming this is big enough to give me a fair impression.

Anyway, I'm happy because now I have a means of attaching the clamp-on Chrosziel mattebox which has served my poor old DVX with distinction for the past 2 years.
 
Back in the day when I was shooting stills, I got to the point where every lens had a UV or Skylight filter on the front. Then, I started to shoot without them. Could I see a difference? Well no, not really - but I felt I was getting a better image from the naked lens.

Today shooting video, I have a box full of filters which I now rarely use because a lot of effects can be added in post. As others have stated, if I'm worried about damage to the front element, I'll put on a filter.

I think that most any filter maker using good optical glass can produce a good product. I also think that if your shot (with a filter on the lens) is carefully positioned and shielded from direct light (by using a matte box, flag, whatever...) that you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between filter-on or filter-off. If you use a cheaper filter and you expose it to difficult lighting conditions - like direct sunlight hitting the surface of the filter on an angle - you will probably start to see the differences between non-coated, single-coated and multi-coated products.

My two cents...

Michael
 
I agree on the clear filters - we have these on our DVX 100 at work and you really can't see a difference.
But with the Tiffen Cir-Pol on the Canon 18x zoom lens it's totally different - the picture at 162mm focal length is totally unusable. It's not just "a little worse", it's crap! I'm not sure if this filter is single or multi-coated, but a Tiffen 82mm circular pol is not the worst, is it? And then I shot with a B+W multi-coated ND and B+W multi coated cir pol on a little Sony PC100E single chip camcorder - the image on this camcorder is already bad in 10x zoom without filters, but with the filters it turns into total crap (sharp edges become a multi-colored mess).

I shot an air show once with a Sony DXC D30 and a crappy old Fujinon news lens. Another Team was there with a DigiBeta and matte box. Can't say what filters they were using, but when I saw their material (we broadcasted their stuff a few weeks later because they had produced a feature-length program from the air show) I realized there was something wrong. All their close-up shots from planes in the air looked a lot worse than mine, they all had this blurry look. At the time I wondered how this could have happened, given they had a much better camera and probably a much better lens. Now I know it must have been the filters which just don't seem to match with zoom lenses.

I seem to be pretty alone with this opinion, everybody I asked so far told me they never had any problems with filters... I'll capture some pictures if nobody believes me :)

what about the built in filter of the hvx? does that comprimise quality? I usually use it when its very bright, so that i dont bring the fstops high
Click to expand...
No problem with built-in ND filters, I use them all the time with the DXC D30, DVX100 and HVX200. The difference is they're behind the lens, not in front of it (at least I guess that's the difference...)
 
Last edited:
interesting, not that I dont believe you, I'd just be curious to know what is causing this phenomenon. Similiar to a non zoom through wide angle maybe?
 
Similiar to a non zoom through wide angle maybe?
Click to expand...
What do you mean with a non-zoom through wide angle?

However, you just reminded me of my problems with a wide-angle adapter. We have this like 2000$ Canon wide-angle 0,8x apapter for the Canon 18x lens. It's good until you zoom in more than about 10-12x, then it starts to do the same as the pol filter, edges become blurry, the whole frame is like out of focus and out of color. With the pol filter it's worse, but it's still very visible with the wide angle adapter (which was made for this lens by the same manufacturer and which wasn't cheap)
 
The Schneider / Century Optics 0.6x WA for instance is a non zoom-through adapter, the HVX is unable to maintain focus past 33mm.
 
Thoff - any clue as to why this happens optically and what the difference is between a non zoom through and a zoom through as far as the mechanics go? I've got the century btw - a nice little lens for the price. no heavy zooming of course.
 
any experience whit LENSBABY(the new model 2 or 3G that has a better glass) about the drop in resolution??
HOW MUCH is it bad for resolution??
Timur,i know that you have used it.what about the drop in resolution whit this lens and CA.what was your experince??
:laugh:
BEST ,
IVAN
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top