UV lenses on digital cameras?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Phil Stripling, Jan 19, 2004.

  1. I see posts on occasion here in rpd about someone buying a UV lens for
    their digital cameras. I have a CoolPix 990, and I'm not really up on
    digital issue -- is there a reason to have a UV filter on a digital camera?
    I'm used to the discussion over usefulness having to do with film, so does
    the same apply to CCDs. Or are people buying for lens protection?
    --
    Philip Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
    Legal Assistance on the Web | spam and read later. email to philip@
    http://www.PhilipStripling.com/ | my domain is read daily.
    Phil Stripling, Jan 19, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Phil Stripling

    Hogleg44/40 Guest

    Hello, Phil!
    You wrote on 19 Jan 2004 15:35:21 -0800:

    The UV is frequently used as a protection (Cheap to replace) lens, to
    protect the (very expensive to replace), front camera optical lens.

    PS> I see posts on occasion here in rpd about someone buying a UV lens for
    PS> their digital cameras. I have a CoolPix 990, and I'm not really up on
    PS> digital issue -- is there a reason to have a UV filter on a digital
    PS> camera? I'm used to the discussion over usefulness having to do with
    PS> film, so does the same apply to CCDs. Or are people buying for lens
    PS> protection? --
    PS> Philip Stripling | email to the replyto address is
    PS> presumed Legal Assistance on the Web | spam and read later. email
    PS> to philip@ http://www.PhilipStripling.com/ | my domain is read daily.

    With best regards, Hogleg44/40.
    Hogleg44/40, Jan 19, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Phil Stripling

    KBob Guest

    On 19 Jan 2004 15:35:21 -0800, Phil Stripling
    <> wrote:

    >I see posts on occasion here in rpd about someone buying a UV lens for
    >their digital cameras. I have a CoolPix 990, and I'm not really up on
    >digital issue -- is there a reason to have a UV filter on a digital camera?
    >I'm used to the discussion over usefulness having to do with film, so does
    >the same apply to CCDs. Or are people buying for lens protection?


    On the 990, it's a good idea to have some kind of easy-to-clean
    protective "filter" screwed on, just so long as it doesn't vignette at
    the WA setting or interferes with the viewfinder etc. One problem
    with these is that with the short FL involved, the least bit of debris
    or tiny droplet on its surface will raise hell with the image,
    requiring frequent attention with a cleaning cloth.

    There is no advantage to using a "UV" filter with digital cameras,
    apart from their protection of the front element. They do little to
    block UV in any case, and for silicon CCDs there is only a very weak
    response to near UV that has never been shown to benefit from such
    filters. I use strong haze filters when photographing fluorescent
    specimens under intense ambient UV lighting, but this is an extreme
    situation.
    KBob, Jan 20, 2004
    #3
  4. Phil Stripling

    CBM Guest

    The Foveon Chip need it as the sky looks too blue.
    Its very sensitive to UV.



    "KBob" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 19 Jan 2004 15:35:21 -0800, Phil Stripling
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >I see posts on occasion here in rpd about someone buying a UV lens for
    > >their digital cameras. I have a CoolPix 990, and I'm not really up on
    > >digital issue -- is there a reason to have a UV filter on a digital

    camera?
    > >I'm used to the discussion over usefulness having to do with film, so

    does
    > >the same apply to CCDs. Or are people buying for lens protection?

    >
    > On the 990, it's a good idea to have some kind of easy-to-clean
    > protective "filter" screwed on, just so long as it doesn't vignette at
    > the WA setting or interferes with the viewfinder etc. One problem
    > with these is that with the short FL involved, the least bit of debris
    > or tiny droplet on its surface will raise hell with the image,
    > requiring frequent attention with a cleaning cloth.
    >
    > There is no advantage to using a "UV" filter with digital cameras,
    > apart from their protection of the front element. They do little to
    > block UV in any case, and for silicon CCDs there is only a very weak
    > response to near UV that has never been shown to benefit from such
    > filters. I use strong haze filters when photographing fluorescent
    > specimens under intense ambient UV lighting, but this is an extreme
    > situation.
    CBM, Jan 20, 2004
    #4
  5. On 2004-01-20, KBob <> wrote:
    > There is no advantage to using a "UV" filter with digital cameras,
    > apart from their protection of the front element. They do little to
    > block UV in any case, and for silicon CCDs there is only a very weak
    > response to near UV that has never been shown to benefit from such
    > filters. I use strong haze filters when photographing fluorescent
    > specimens under intense ambient UV lighting, but this is an extreme
    > situation.


    How much UV light will go through the glass in the lenses anyway ?
    Plain glass stops 99,5% UVA + UVB light.
    Povl H. Pedersen, Jan 20, 2004
    #5
  6. Phil Stripling

    KBob Guest

    On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:19:12 GMT, "CBM" <> wrote:

    >The Foveon Chip need it as the sky looks too blue.
    > Its very sensitive to UV.
    >
    >

    This is interesting, since the Kodak 14n also shows surprising
    sensitivity to UV (no microlens filter), and I'm wondering if this may
    have something to do with the reddish cast that some claim it has.
    It's the first camera I've tested that didn't require 30 second
    exposure times to get anything useful. I tested this with a Rolyn
    360nm UV pass filter stacked with an IR hot mirror, so I'm sure it's
    UV.

    On the other (and generally more useful) end, it evidently fails in
    the IR department--while there is plenty of sensitivity (even with a
    900nm filter), the image is unusable do to strange flaring effects
    and a center "hot spot" that I'm unable to identify the cause of, and
    the same problem exists both with 720nm and 900nm filters.
    KBob, Jan 20, 2004
    #6
  7. Phil Stripling

    CBM Guest

    Found the discussion in a SD9 review from having the blue sky problem, and
    he was told from the Foveon guys to try a UV filter to help out. As the
    reviewer said it would seem like the chip maker would have incorporated it
    into the chip itself.

    Found here
    www.dpreview.com/



    "Povl H. Pedersen" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 2004-01-20, KBob <> wrote:
    > > There is no advantage to using a "UV" filter with digital cameras,
    > > apart from their protection of the front element. They do little to
    > > block UV in any case, and for silicon CCDs there is only a very weak
    > > response to near UV that has never been shown to benefit from such
    > > filters. I use strong haze filters when photographing fluorescent
    > > specimens under intense ambient UV lighting, but this is an extreme
    > > situation.

    >
    > How much UV light will go through the glass in the lenses anyway ?
    > Plain glass stops 99,5% UVA + UVB light.
    CBM, Jan 20, 2004
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. zxcvar
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    890
    (Pete Cresswell)
    Jan 4, 2004
  2. One4All
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    916
    David Dyer-Bennet
    Jan 14, 2007
  3. wagwheel

    Cameras--Cameras--Cameras

    wagwheel, Mar 31, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    420
    Mark B.
    Apr 1, 2007
  4. wagwheel

    Cameras--Cameras--Cameras

    wagwheel, Apr 1, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    414
    Ken Lucke
    Apr 1, 2007
  5. veritas

    extension lenses and compact digital cameras

    veritas, Jul 2, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    678
Loading...

Share This Page