E-PL1 / 14-42mm / UV Filter reflection

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by craigatkinson, Jul 19, 2010.

  1. craigatkinson

    craigatkinson New to Mu-43

    9
    Jul 19, 2010
    Hi, first post!
    I have an EPL1 and last night was the first outing with the kit lens, 14-42mm. I have a Kenko UV filter attached. See the reflections below, crazy! So I thought about a hood instead but have read that the lens shouldn't be used with a hood because it'll be too heavy for the lens itself, even a light hood.

    I've always used point and shoot so I'd appreciate any suggestions you have.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. PeterB666

    PeterB666 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    780
    Jan 14, 2010
    Tura Beach, Australia
    Peter
    First thing to do is get rid of the filter, you don't need it. Digital cameras don't have an issue with UV.

    You may be able to get away with a light hood but for indoors work, you don't need that either.

    If you are thinking of physical protection of the lens, then just take care.

    I did have UV filters on every lens but now I don't. Instead, how I have is a bag full of UV filters that no longer get used.
     
  3. BBW

    BBW Super Moderator Emeritus

    Craig, thanks for posting your first of many, I hope, photos on mu-43.com.:wink:

    There are filters and there are filters, as you will see if you read through this lively thread: https://www.mu-43.com/f67/filters-639/ Some never ever use them, others do but only certain types, etc. Filters are discussed in other threads as well but I think that's the longest one.

    I do have filters on my lenses because I feel they help protect the lenses, but we don't all agree about filters as you'll see if you read through that thread. I'm not familiar with the type you have but perhaps the quality is not what it should be?

    Craig, if you can make it through the filter thread it would be great if you'd stop by the Welcomes and Introductions forum. Happy reading!:biggrin:
     
  4. pxpaulx

    pxpaulx Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 19, 2010
    Midwest
    Paul
    Yeah Check out the filter thread BBW pointed out - I believe in the test linked through that thread that Kenko is about the worst - like putting a window in front of the lens essentially. There are much better filters out there (and at 40.5mm none of them will break the bank). I don't use filters personally - usually I have hoods on my lenses, with the exception of this lens and the panny 20mm. Adding a hood to the 14-42mm in particular I think would look rather silly! I am sure there are small hoods out there (check ebay) that would work though. I believe the front element on the 14-42mm actually is essentially a filter (notice it is flat), so in the event of damage it is likely an inexpensive repair.

    Also, just a thought, but with the overall build of the 14-42mm compacting design, any damage that is significant enough to bang up that front element is likely going to do serious damage to the entire lens anyway, likely needing replacement (i.e. would cost more to repair than replace).
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. craigatkinson

    craigatkinson New to Mu-43

    9
    Jul 19, 2010
    Hi all,
    thanks for that - I will go and check those threads now - filters / new user.

    Maybe I'm panicking too much! I have read that hoods will be better, but I also read that a hood on the 14-42 would probably damage it due to the slight stature of the lens! Agreed though, a knock would probably do the whole lens in.

    Interesting about the filter on the front of the 20mm. I had noticed it was flat but didn't consider that a filter - will do more research on that.

    Thanks again.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. bilzmale

    bilzmale Mu-43 All-Pro

    Craig with the folding mechanism of that lens I wouldn't add anything that may put extra strain on it. And yes cheap filters are worse than useless. I was a filter fan in the past but currently do not use them (except polariser when needed).
     
    • Like Like x 1