Cavision LH77 and Hoya Filter for A1?
 

I have gotten most of my accessories for my A1 by now, but there a still a few more I'd like to get.

Because I have the Sony Y wideangle lens, I plan on getting the Cavision LH77 lens hood eventually even if it's not the best lens hood for all zoom settings and aspect ratios. First, is this lens hood a perfect square, 4:3, or 16:9?

Second, I am looking for a filter to attach to the LH77 (82mm filter) to protect my wideangle lens. I have been looking at Hoya Super Multi-coated UV(0) filter. It has 12 layers of coating, the most they offer I think. Is this a good filter?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEWA%3AIT&rd=1

Also, in the chart in the description for that ebay listing, it says:
Super HMC has 12 coatings, 99.7% effective light transmission, and is 5mm thick. The Super HMC Pro-1 also has 12 coatings, 99.7% effective light transmission, but is only 3mm thick. What are the advantages of being thicker or slimmer?

I've also read that UV filters are pretty unnecessary as glass itself absorbs UV. Yet, it seems that during certain conditions when there is a lot of haze or whatever, a UV filter would produce a much better image - is that true? And if UV filters are unnecessary, what would be a good filter to get to use primary as a lens protector, and a filter as a secondary function? I want to always keep this filter on, so all my shots will be filtered by it (unless I switch to another filter), so I don't want this protective filter to change the image significantly. What type of filter would be good for this purpose?

Also, is Hoya a good brand for filters? I've heard of Tiffen, B&W, etc. too. How do those compare? If all of them are of similar quality, where exactly do the differences lay and which one is best in your opinion and why? Please don't tell me that they are all pretty much the same, won't be disappointed with any, as that doesn't help me make a decision as to which brand/filter to get.

Thanks!

I have that UV-filter with LH77. First of all, LH77 looks cool and can help some sunny situations, but LH77 (plastic) is little bit too softy (it can't keep circle shape when tighten, so you have to loose it always while screwing UV filter on/off). But it's worth of money anyway and of course the best part is you can use filters with Y-lense. Super HMC Pro-1 is good UV-filter, but it's very hard to clean because you can't use alcohol based cleaner with layered filters.
Personally I remove UV-lense when shooting indoors.

I ordered the LH77, so I'll see it soon, but it doesn't look like 16:9 hood? And I will be shooting 16:9 most of the time. The not being able to screw filters on while staying attached the the lens is inconvenient, but not that bad a deal. Could anyone answer my other lens hood questions from above?

And the filters - so how does Hoya compare to other brands, and what's difference between the 3mm and 5mm super-multi-coated UV filter (other than size)? Disadvantages and advantages of both?

Yeps, it is 4:3 (12x9cm), but at least it doesn't come into frame view.

So are Cavision making a range of 16:9 hoods now? I suppose I could go over for a look-see, but I thought I'd ask you hood buyers first.

http://www.cavision.com/pictures/SonyHDV/SonyHDV.htm

Would it be possible to use any of those matt boxes with the HDR-HC1 or is this camera simply to small for a system like this?

Matt boxes are always a very good idea, regardless of the size of the camera being used. Of course it can get a bit ungainly if you're the run 'n' gun type, but so too can a good solid tripod.

No Tripod's too good for the HC1 Floris. No microphone's too good, no lighting set-up, no videographer's skills, nothing. The HC1 has so much sheer potential that anything you do to help it will lift it even higher.

tom.

UV filters are useful for shooting outside under hazy conditions - they'll help prevent the image from becoming washed out and milky (too low contrast) looking. Many videographers use UV filters to protect the lens from getting scratched.

Filters, much like lighting, allow you to "paint" the image. What kind of a look do you want from the camera? The look you want will determine which filters you may want to use. If you want to lower contrast (like when shooting outside during a sunny day), a low contrast or ultra-con would be useful. If you want to add halation (glow) around highlights, a very light grade (1/8 or 1/4) promist would be useful. If you want to increase red saturation, a 1/2 or 1 enhancer would be useful.

Since I normally do film production work, I usually use Tiffen, Schneider or Harrison and Harrison filters, but any good quality still photography filters should work just as well under most conditions.

Jessica

Many people say UV filters are worthless as glass absorbs UV itself. Many people report no difference using UV filters and no UV filters as conditions generally are not hazy enough to show a difference. So basically, I find that a $100 UV filter would do me no good.

Ideally, I want a filter that has some positive filtering effect that I would want for most of my shots that is cheap and quality to protect my lens.

So what is a filter that would produce generally wanted effects on the majority of point-and-shoot footage?

Well, they're not useless - they're designed to be used under specific conditions to address specific issues/problems. Think of them as tools, sometimes you need a hammer, sometimes you need a screwdriver.

If you want a general purpose filter to protect the lens which would also be helpful under many shooting conditions, a 1/2 Ultracon would be worth considering - it takes the light hitting the lens and spreads it into the shadow areas so highlights don't blow out quite so quickly and so you can see a little further into the shadows.

If you're not sure what effect you want from a filter and you're mostly concerned about cost, you could get a clear glass filter to protect the lens. It won't do anything to the image, but will keep the lens from getting scratched.

Jessica

Alex.... analysis paralysis !!

The standard filter for a combo of lens-protection or ultra-violet filtering is... a UV filter.
Glass does tend to filter UV radiation true. These filters are generally used to protect the front-element and if they filter UV too, so much the better. It´s principally a safeguard. Personally i'd get the 37mm and that will both do when you´re not using the WA lens, and it will also work equally well when you ARE using the WA lens - just attach it between WA lens and cam body.

Just buy a good-qual multi-coated 37mm UV filter (or the big one if you want), fit it and move on!

IMHO.

Cavision LH77
 

B&H does not list a Cavision LH77. The closest I see is a Cavision LH80. I assume the numerical part of the model is the diameter? If so, is that what I need with the Sony wide angle lens, a 77mm hood? Does anyone know where I can get the Cavision LH77, or another hood that will work with the sony wide anlge and allow the use of filters. 16x9 shape would be even better. Thanks, PK

BH has the LH77 on phone order only for I think $39, cheaper than Cavision's $49 (+ expensive shipping).

But as far as filters go: the Ultracon sounds awesome. Never heard of it. Could you tell me more info, brand, coatings, number of coatings, etc.? Does it reduce f-stops? I'm also wondering if by spreading the light into the shadows, does it reduce the lighting on the light parts?

Where can I find clear glass filters (82mm)? Does it need lots of coatings to have more light transmission, just like all the other filters?

Also, while a 37mm filter would be useful when not using the Wide angle lens, most of the time, I am using the WA lens, so the 37mm wouldn't work well as a lens protector at all.

And what's analysis paralysis? Lol.

You can read more about Tiffen's ultra contrast filters here:

http://www.2filter.com/tiffen/tiffen...stfilters.html

But those JPEGs aren't the greatest examples of what ultra cons can do.

On my Sony HVR-A1U I've put my 37mm 1/8 promist filter on the camera then attached the wide angle adapter onto it; if I used a 62mm promist on the front of the wide angle adapter, then the grain of the filter would show up in the image when the camera is stopped down under bright light. Since there's no grain, etching, design, dimples, etc. on the ultra con, you should be able to screw it onto your wide angle adapter if you like instead of onto the camera before the wide angle adapter like I do.

(I'll eventually get a mattebox to attach onto the wide angle adatper so I can use ND filters, ultracons or grads.)

Jessica

From the site, it suggests low contrast to achieve a more film look (which I am after) rather than ultra contrast.