Questions for SR11/12 owners. at DVinfo.net

Mike Burgess · May 14th, 2008, 03:04 PM

Hello. Has anyone has added a UV filter to their SR11/12? Am wondering if a UV filter might have more adverse effects than positive effects on this camcorder. Also, has anyone noticed any difference between shooting 1920 and 1440, and viewing on a 720p plasma?
Thanks.
Mike

Paul Cronin · May 14th, 2008, 03:10 PM

Mike no adverse effects with a UV filter. Only shoot HQ 1920.

Tom O'Farrell · May 15th, 2008, 12:00 AM

I wrote a warning thread a couple of weeks ago about not using a UV filter for the purpose of protecting the lens shutters against dust etc. I have a wrecked Sony DVD403 to show for not having a UV filter on at all times.

Paul Cronin · May 15th, 2008, 08:46 AM

I agree with Tom the UV glass is cheap compared to a new lens face. I do the same on my Sony EX1 and all cameras I have owned over the years.

Mike Burgess · May 15th, 2008, 01:38 PM

Thanks guys, for the responses.
I did a quickie test, comparing a shot with and without the UV filter. My subject was a scenery shot from a high hilltop. There was such a small difference that for all intents and purposes, there was no difference. Indoors, shooting something that is lit through a sunlit window, there is some difference with the color maroon. Didn't seem to affect the yellows and greens. So for what its worth, I too would say that a UV filter changes very, very little. Hoping that on humid days, or days with lots of haze, things will look better. As for the protection, great point.

Mike Burgess

May 14th, 2008, 03:04 PM	#1
Mike Burgess Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Traverse City, Michigan Posts: 416	Questions for SR11/12 owners. Hello. Has anyone has added a UV filter to their SR11/12? Am wondering if a UV filter might have more adverse effects than positive effects on this camcorder. Also, has anyone noticed any difference between shooting 1920 and 1440, and viewing on a 720p plasma? Thanks. Mike

May 14th, 2008, 03:10 PM	#2
Paul Cronin Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 4,048	Mike no adverse effects with a UV filter. Only shoot HQ 1920. __________________ Paul Cronin www.paulcroninstudios.com

May 15th, 2008, 12:00 AM	#3
Tom O'Farrell Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Sarnia. Ontario. Canada. Posts: 25	I wrote a warning thread a couple of weeks ago about not using a UV filter for the purpose of protecting the lens shutters against dust etc. I have a wrecked Sony DVD403 to show for not having a UV filter on at all times. __________________ Tom O'Farrell.

May 15th, 2008, 08:46 AM	#4
Paul Cronin Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 4,048	I agree with Tom the UV glass is cheap compared to a new lens face. I do the same on my Sony EX1 and all cameras I have owned over the years. __________________ Paul Cronin www.paulcroninstudios.com

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

May 15th, 2008, 01:38 PM	#5
Mike Burgess Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Traverse City, Michigan Posts: 416	Thanks guys, for the responses. I did a quickie test, comparing a shot with and without the UV filter. My subject was a scenery shot from a high hilltop. There was such a small difference that for all intents and purposes, there was no difference. Indoors, shooting something that is lit through a sunlit window, there is some difference with the color maroon. Didn't seem to affect the yellows and greens. So for what its worth, I too would say that a UV filter changes very, very little. Hoping that on humid days, or days with lots of haze, things will look better. As for the protection, great point. Mike Burgess