-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
- Thread starter majohnson2
- Start date
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
Speaking as an amateur photographer.It sounds like a good idea initially but doing so will had two more glass surfaces that can add glare which will degrade an image .That said a #8 yellow filter may aid in contrast a bit (i.e. yellow shooting glasses). Also less expensive scopes may benefit from the UV at high magnifications if atmospheric haze is an issue .I haven't tried it on rifle scopes .Just speaking in regards to camera lenses but I would imagine principals are the same .
Speaking as an amateur photographer.It sounds like a good idea initially but doing so will had two more glass surfaces that can add glare which will degrade an image .That said a #8 yellow filter may aid in contrast a bit (i.e. yellow shooting glasses). Also less expensive scopes may benefit from the UV at high magnifications if atmospheric haze is an issue .I haven't tried it on rifle scopes .Just speaking in regards to camera lenses but I would imagine principals are the same .
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone try using a camera lens filter to protect your scopes lens form the elements? They come in all different sizes, along with colors including what referred to as UV.</div></div>
Provided that the objective's barrel is threaded to accept a filter or other accessory a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">high quality</span></span> camera filter is a great way to protect the objective lens. You need to know the exact thread size and pitch, as the filter's thread size is usually larger than the lens size (i.e., a Zeiss 65T FL takes a 67mm filter). I used a Hoya Super SMC UV Filter on my Zeiss 65T FL and it worked great. I sold my 65T FL after comparing it against my <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Optolyth S80 HD Compact Spotting Scope</span></span> and would love to be able to run a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">B & W</span></span> or <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya SMC</span></span> UV Filter on the Optolyth S80 HD Compact, but the barrel isn't threaded in front of the Objective.
Also, while camera filters come in many different colors <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">"UV"</span></span> is not one of them. <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">"UV"</span></span> stands for <span style="font-style: italic">"Ultra violet"</span>. <span style="font-style: italic">"Ultra violet"</span> light is electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength shorter than light visible to the human eye, so in practical terms ultra violet light is "colorless". UV light is invisible to humans, but it's effects can be noted in chemical reactions such as sunburn and some substances glowing under a "black light".
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its been awhile since I have done any photography but I don't think using the UV filter changed the f-stop much if any. Its more about saving the lens delicate glass which would be the same thing as protecting are scopes glass.</div></div>
Correct. As the UV light spectrum is invisible to the <span style="font-style: italic">human</span> eye the f-stop setting on a camera should not be affected much. Although "good" UV filters are effective in cutting haze and glare their main function has traditionally been considered lens protection.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> A UV filter runs about $10 and when it get damaged, its a disposable item.</div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic"><span style="text-decoration: underline">Cheap</span></span></span> UV filters run about $10.00. The very best UV filters use Schott glass and are Super Multi-Coated to eliminate reflection and transmit the highest amount of light possible - those can run more than $100.00 depending on filter size and features. Examples are the highest end <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">B & W</span></span> and <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya SMC</span></span> UV filters. Some "Super SLIM" types such as the Hoya Pro 1 Digital use an extremely thin glass element and filter ring and are threaded on both sides so that they can be added in front of or behind another accessory.
A point of interest is that Hoya is the only manufacturer that is licensed by Schott to make Schott glass. That says a lot about Hoya's Quality Control and Hoya filters overall.
Keith
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone try using a camera lens filter to protect your scopes lens form the elements? They come in all different sizes, along with colors including what referred to as UV.</div></div>
Provided that the objective's barrel is threaded to accept a filter or other accessory a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">high quality</span></span> camera filter is a great way to protect the objective lens. You need to know the exact thread size and pitch, as the filter's thread size is usually larger than the lens size (i.e., a Zeiss 65T FL takes a 67mm filter). I used a Hoya Super SMC UV Filter on my Zeiss 65T FL and it worked great. I sold my 65T FL after comparing it against my <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Optolyth S80 HD Compact Spotting Scope</span></span> and would love to be able to run a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">B & W</span></span> or <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya SMC</span></span> UV Filter on the Optolyth S80 HD Compact, but the barrel isn't threaded in front of the Objective.
Also, while camera filters come in many different colors <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">"UV"</span></span> is not one of them. <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">"UV"</span></span> stands for <span style="font-style: italic">"Ultra violet"</span>. <span style="font-style: italic">"Ultra violet"</span> light is electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength shorter than light visible to the human eye, so in practical terms ultra violet light is "colorless". UV light is invisible to humans, but it's effects can be noted in chemical reactions such as sunburn and some substances glowing under a "black light".
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its been awhile since I have done any photography but I don't think using the UV filter changed the f-stop much if any. Its more about saving the lens delicate glass which would be the same thing as protecting are scopes glass.</div></div>
Correct. As the UV light spectrum is invisible to the <span style="font-style: italic">human</span> eye the f-stop setting on a camera should not be affected much. Although "good" UV filters are effective in cutting haze and glare their main function has traditionally been considered lens protection.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> A UV filter runs about $10 and when it get damaged, its a disposable item.</div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic"><span style="text-decoration: underline">Cheap</span></span></span> UV filters run about $10.00. The very best UV filters use Schott glass and are Super Multi-Coated to eliminate reflection and transmit the highest amount of light possible - those can run more than $100.00 depending on filter size and features. Examples are the highest end <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">B & W</span></span> and <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya SMC</span></span> UV filters. Some "Super SLIM" types such as the Hoya Pro 1 Digital use an extremely thin glass element and filter ring and are threaded on both sides so that they can be added in front of or behind another accessory.
A point of interest is that Hoya is the only manufacturer that is licensed by Schott to make Schott glass. That says a lot about Hoya's Quality Control and Hoya filters overall.
Keith
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
I run a USO's large honeycomb ARD's on all my rifles. Nothing touches the lens, rain stays outta the way where it belongs, I perceive improved depth perceptions in shaded targets and haze.
Works for me.
I run a USO's large honeycomb ARD's on all my rifles. Nothing touches the lens, rain stays outta the way where it belongs, I perceive improved depth perceptions in shaded targets and haze.
Works for me.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
Been running one for years on my first NXS. This something that you can't skimp and cut costs on. As in anything else, the system is only as good as its weakest component.Put a cheap filter on an S&B and you might as well have saved your money and bought a BSA.
Been running one for years on my first NXS. This something that you can't skimp and cut costs on. As in anything else, the system is only as good as its weakest component.Put a cheap filter on an S&B and you might as well have saved your money and bought a BSA.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Looking at my Vortex PST, even the sunshade is threaded which would allow the installation of a UV filter. I'm just trying to come up with a viable way of protecting my scopes optical glass.</div></div>
If you're talking about threading a UV onto the front of the Sunshade, don't. If a filter is utilized it should be threaded directly into the objective threads, then the Sunshade or ARD should be threaded into the front of the UV Filter. Placing a filter in front of a Sunshade or an ARD defeats the purpose of the Sunshade or ARD, exposing the filter's surface to sunlight. Reflection and/or glare on the filter's surface can "wash-out" the image as well as reduce the amount of light that can be transmitted through the scope itself.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As pointed out, almost all filters are double threaded which would allow use of a more then one filter. Its something that might be worth trying.</div></div>
Using more than one filter is neither required or desirable. You want to protect the Objective Lens while preserving the image quality and performance. A high quality UV Filter (I recommend a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya Pro 1 Digital</span></span> or a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">B & W</span></span>) will do that. And as I just stated the UV filter should be threaded directly into the threads of the Objective Bell. <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya Pro 1 Digital</span></span> UV Filters use the same thread front and rear, so you can thread a Hoya Pro 1 Digital UV filter into the objective and then thread the Sunshade or ARD into the front of the filter as I suggest. Do what you want, but that's the correct orientation when a filter and a Sunshade or an ARD are used on a scope.
Keith
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Looking at my Vortex PST, even the sunshade is threaded which would allow the installation of a UV filter. I'm just trying to come up with a viable way of protecting my scopes optical glass.</div></div>
If you're talking about threading a UV onto the front of the Sunshade, don't. If a filter is utilized it should be threaded directly into the objective threads, then the Sunshade or ARD should be threaded into the front of the UV Filter. Placing a filter in front of a Sunshade or an ARD defeats the purpose of the Sunshade or ARD, exposing the filter's surface to sunlight. Reflection and/or glare on the filter's surface can "wash-out" the image as well as reduce the amount of light that can be transmitted through the scope itself.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As pointed out, almost all filters are double threaded which would allow use of a more then one filter. Its something that might be worth trying.</div></div>
Using more than one filter is neither required or desirable. You want to protect the Objective Lens while preserving the image quality and performance. A high quality UV Filter (I recommend a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya Pro 1 Digital</span></span> or a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">B & W</span></span>) will do that. And as I just stated the UV filter should be threaded directly into the threads of the Objective Bell. <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya Pro 1 Digital</span></span> UV Filters use the same thread front and rear, so you can thread a Hoya Pro 1 Digital UV filter into the objective and then thread the Sunshade or ARD into the front of the filter as I suggest. Do what you want, but that's the correct orientation when a filter and a Sunshade or an ARD are used on a scope.
Keith
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
Actually Leupold been doing this with their Alumina intensifier filters for years now. I also believe that Zeiss offers filters for their scopes also. I like this feature also from my photography days to protect the main lens. The only issue that I see is matching up the objective thread rather than the size.
Actually Leupold been doing this with their Alumina intensifier filters for years now. I also believe that Zeiss offers filters for their scopes also. I like this feature also from my photography days to protect the main lens. The only issue that I see is matching up the objective thread rather than the size.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was only point out that even the sunshade is threaded.</div></div>
Yes, we know this. The threads at the rear of the Sunshade are <span style="font-style: italic">male</span> and thread into the <span style="font-style: italic">female</span> threads of the PST's Objective Bell. (As I suggested) a filter can be threaded into the Objective Bell's (female) threads, then the male threads (at the rear of the Sunshade) may be threaded into the female threads on the front of the filter.
I don't remember if the PST Sunshade is threaded at the front, but from what you said you before:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Looking at my Vortex PST, even the sunshade is threaded which would allow the installation of a UV filter.</div></div>
....you seemed to be alluding to threading a filter into the front of the Sunshade. Even if the front of the Sunshade is threaded, for reasons I've already explained above the front of the ARD is the wrong place to stack a filter.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm just trying to come up with a viable way of protecting my scopes optical glass.</div></div>
Then follow my suggestion and buy a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya Pro 1 Digital UV Filter</span></span> and thread it directly into your scope's Objective Bell, then thread the Sunshade into the (front) of the UV filter. Done.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">it was posted "Provided that the objective's barrel is threaded to accept a filter" </div></div>
Yes - <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">the Objective's barrel</span></span>. The Objective's "barrel" is where a filter should be threaded, with the Sunshade or ARD assembly threaded into the front of the filter. Again, this is the correct way to stack the accessories. I also explained the reasons for this above. What are you trying to say?
Keith
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was only point out that even the sunshade is threaded.</div></div>
Yes, we know this. The threads at the rear of the Sunshade are <span style="font-style: italic">male</span> and thread into the <span style="font-style: italic">female</span> threads of the PST's Objective Bell. (As I suggested) a filter can be threaded into the Objective Bell's (female) threads, then the male threads (at the rear of the Sunshade) may be threaded into the female threads on the front of the filter.
I don't remember if the PST Sunshade is threaded at the front, but from what you said you before:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Looking at my Vortex PST, even the sunshade is threaded which would allow the installation of a UV filter.</div></div>
....you seemed to be alluding to threading a filter into the front of the Sunshade. Even if the front of the Sunshade is threaded, for reasons I've already explained above the front of the ARD is the wrong place to stack a filter.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm just trying to come up with a viable way of protecting my scopes optical glass.</div></div>
Then follow my suggestion and buy a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Hoya Pro 1 Digital UV Filter</span></span> and thread it directly into your scope's Objective Bell, then thread the Sunshade into the (front) of the UV filter. Done.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">it was posted "Provided that the objective's barrel is threaded to accept a filter" </div></div>
Yes - <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">the Objective's barrel</span></span>. The Objective's "barrel" is where a filter should be threaded, with the Sunshade or ARD assembly threaded into the front of the filter. Again, this is the correct way to stack the accessories. I also explained the reasons for this above. What are you trying to say?
Keith
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Craven Morehead</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually Leupold been doing this with their Alumina intensifier filters for years now. I also believe that Zeiss offers filters for their scopes also. I like this feature also from my photography days to protect the main lens. The only issue that I see is matching up the objective thread rather than the size. </div></div>
The only real way to ensure that both the filter size and thread pitch is correct before buying is to take the scope to a camera shop. The problem here is if the scope is already mounted and you don't have an identical "spare" to take to the shop you'll look rather strange carrying a rifle into the camera shop. I know that people in Oregon aren't gun-phobic like the sheeple are in Califonia, but I can still hear some news anchor saying: <span style="font-style: italic">"An Oregon man was arrested for brandishing a high-powered sniper rifle in a camera store, film at eleven."</span>
Keith
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Craven Morehead</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually Leupold been doing this with their Alumina intensifier filters for years now. I also believe that Zeiss offers filters for their scopes also. I like this feature also from my photography days to protect the main lens. The only issue that I see is matching up the objective thread rather than the size. </div></div>
The only real way to ensure that both the filter size and thread pitch is correct before buying is to take the scope to a camera shop. The problem here is if the scope is already mounted and you don't have an identical "spare" to take to the shop you'll look rather strange carrying a rifle into the camera shop. I know that people in Oregon aren't gun-phobic like the sheeple are in Califonia, but I can still hear some news anchor saying: <span style="font-style: italic">"An Oregon man was arrested for brandishing a high-powered sniper rifle in a camera store, film at eleven."</span>
Keith
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
sounds good whats $100 filter insurance on a $3500 sb,thats money well spent
and loosen the two bolts and take the scope only in... quality rings and 5 min and your rifle is rezero'd?
sounds good whats $100 filter insurance on a $3500 sb,thats money well spent
and loosen the two bolts and take the scope only in... quality rings and 5 min and your rifle is rezero'd?
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aries64</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I know that people in Oregon aren't gun-phobic like the sheeple are in Califonia, but I can still hear some news anchor saying: <span style="font-style: italic">"An Oregon man was arrested for brandishing a high-powered sniper rifle in a camera store, film at eleven."</span></div></div>
This is too true. But I think that Aries64 is spot on on this one, you should find a quality filter that fits doing it this way and it is cheap insurance in my opinion.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aries64</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I know that people in Oregon aren't gun-phobic like the sheeple are in Califonia, but I can still hear some news anchor saying: <span style="font-style: italic">"An Oregon man was arrested for brandishing a high-powered sniper rifle in a camera store, film at eleven."</span></div></div>
This is too true. But I think that Aries64 is spot on on this one, you should find a quality filter that fits doing it this way and it is cheap insurance in my opinion.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries
Since the sunshade threads into the scope, do you think I could just take sunshade instead of the rifle. It should be the same size don't you think? </div></div>
This is what I did. No need to remove the scope if youhave the proper size sun shade for it. I was able to find a filter for my NF 56mm and my Bushnell HDMR 50mm, but it appears my NF 50mm is between standard filter sizes.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries
Since the sunshade threads into the scope, do you think I could just take sunshade instead of the rifle. It should be the same size don't you think? </div></div>
This is what I did. No need to remove the scope if youhave the proper size sun shade for it. I was able to find a filter for my NF 56mm and my Bushnell HDMR 50mm, but it appears my NF 50mm is between standard filter sizes.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries
Since the sunshade threads into the scope, do you think I could just take sunshade instead of the rifle. It should be the same size don't you think? </div></div>
Taking the scope to the store is the "sure way", but just taking the Sunshade as <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">buggsb</span></span> did would <span style="font-style: italic">probably</span> work. In my experience SLIM filters that are threaded on both the front (usually female thread) and rear (usually male thread) <span style="text-decoration: underline">typically</span> have the same <span style="font-style: italic">thread</span> <span style="font-weight: bold">and</span> <span style="font-style: italic">pitch</span>. Be sure to check the store's policy about returns and exchanges before you buy the filter. Most photographic stores will exchange "stocked" items within 15 days as long as the merchandize is new in package and you have the original receipt. Refunds refunds may be assessed a "Re-stocking fee".
Keith
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries
Since the sunshade threads into the scope, do you think I could just take sunshade instead of the rifle. It should be the same size don't you think? </div></div>
Taking the scope to the store is the "sure way", but just taking the Sunshade as <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">buggsb</span></span> did would <span style="font-style: italic">probably</span> work. In my experience SLIM filters that are threaded on both the front (usually female thread) and rear (usually male thread) <span style="text-decoration: underline">typically</span> have the same <span style="font-style: italic">thread</span> <span style="font-weight: bold">and</span> <span style="font-style: italic">pitch</span>. Be sure to check the store's policy about returns and exchanges before you buy the filter. Most photographic stores will exchange "stocked" items within 15 days as long as the merchandize is new in package and you have the original receipt. Refunds refunds may be assessed a "Re-stocking fee".
Keith
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
Hey Guys,
I cut my Nightforce sunshade down to 3/4" and threaded it for a Leupold clear lense cover. Works great.
Regards, Paul
Hey Guys,
I cut my Nightforce sunshade down to 3/4" and threaded it for a Leupold clear lense cover. Works great.
Regards, Paul
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 19Scout77</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This thread could REALLY use a picture of a Tac Ops rifle... </div></div>
So post a great photo of YOUR Tac-Ops rifle for us all to admire!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 19Scout77</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This thread could REALLY use a picture of a Tac Ops rifle... </div></div>
So post a great photo of YOUR Tac-Ops rifle for us all to admire!
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
Note: Some Scope Mfg. In my case S&B use a odd thread size, no camera filter or adapter I could fine would fit that thread. I finally got a US Optics ARD, a much better solution IMO
Note: Some Scope Mfg. In my case S&B use a odd thread size, no camera filter or adapter I could fine would fit that thread. I finally got a US Optics ARD, a much better solution IMO
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Unsichtbar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Note: Some Scope Mfg. In my case S&B use a odd thread size, no camera filter or adapter I could fine would fit that thread. I finally got a US Optics ARD, a much better solution IMO </div></div>
Sobrbiker and Unsichtbar are spot on. The best real world solution is a good ARD.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Unsichtbar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Note: Some Scope Mfg. In my case S&B use a odd thread size, no camera filter or adapter I could fine would fit that thread. I finally got a US Optics ARD, a much better solution IMO </div></div>
Sobrbiker and Unsichtbar are spot on. The best real world solution is a good ARD.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can you imagine I was able to take just the sunshade down and find a filter all by myself. It was a bit scary not have some arrogant POS telling me what to do and how to do it. Mandating that I purchase a "Hoya Pro 1 Digital UV Filter" just because he says so. Funny Amazon sells Hoya 52mm for $6 bucks and some change.
I purchased a B&W 52mm and it fits the scope and the hood like glove, imagine that. Sorry for venting, some peoples arrogance is just overwhelming. </div></div>
What was even more overwhelming than your own arrogance was your unwillingness to simply listen and think about what was posted. People were posting trying to help you find a good answer to your question.
Aries was trying to bootstrap the level of good basic information in the thread for anybody who comes to the thread later. The purpose of threads like this are to inform which Aries has done very well. Aries and anyone else with some basic knowledge following the thread would clearly see that you didn't appear to know much about scopes and filters. Aries likely just wanted to post enough of the basics so people could see where he was coming from. Anyone could see you were coming from a position of complete ignorance on the subject.
Don't get your panties in a bunch and take this the wrong way there is NOTHING wrong about being ignorant about something. I look at it like this: ignorance is an opportunity to learn something new. Ignorance can only become a problem if you choose to remain so. Of course you are welcome to disagree about this but you also don't have to be an ass just nod your head and say thank you.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can you imagine I was able to take just the sunshade down and find a filter all by myself. It was a bit scary not have some arrogant POS telling me what to do and how to do it. Mandating that I purchase a "Hoya Pro 1 Digital UV Filter" just because he says so. Funny Amazon sells Hoya 52mm for $6 bucks and some change.
I purchased a B&W 52mm and it fits the scope and the hood like glove, imagine that. Sorry for venting, some peoples arrogance is just overwhelming. </div></div>
What was even more overwhelming than your own arrogance was your unwillingness to simply listen and think about what was posted. People were posting trying to help you find a good answer to your question.
Aries was trying to bootstrap the level of good basic information in the thread for anybody who comes to the thread later. The purpose of threads like this are to inform which Aries has done very well. Aries and anyone else with some basic knowledge following the thread would clearly see that you didn't appear to know much about scopes and filters. Aries likely just wanted to post enough of the basics so people could see where he was coming from. Anyone could see you were coming from a position of complete ignorance on the subject.
Don't get your panties in a bunch and take this the wrong way there is NOTHING wrong about being ignorant about something. I look at it like this: ignorance is an opportunity to learn something new. Ignorance can only become a problem if you choose to remain so. Of course you are welcome to disagree about this but you also don't have to be an ass just nod your head and say thank you.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone try using a camera lens filter to protect your scopes lens form the elements? They come in all different sizes, along with colors including what referred to as UV. Its been awhile since I have done any photography but I don't think using the UV filter changed the f-stop much if any. Its more about saving the lens delicate glass which would be the same thing as protecting are scopes glass. A UV filter runs about $10 and when it get damaged, its a disposable item. </div></div>
Using inexpensive glass filters (that is to say non-Schott glass without high-end multi-coating) is bad idea for just about any use. Even on a moderate quality PST series scope poorly made filters can visibly reduce optical quality by adding flare and distortion. Flare reduces contrast which significantly reduces the usefulness of an optic. Flare is caused by several things but with filters the issue is multiple reflections between the surfaces (internally and air-to-air) of the filter and the objective lens. Flare in filters is primarily caused by using un-coated or poorly designed coatings and poorly aligned filter holders. These issues also affect a scope's internal optical design. Coatings and coating designs are one of the major distinctions between a top of the line scope and a so-so mid-line scope. Same issue of coatings applies to filters. The cost differences between a no-name brand uncoated green glass filter and a good name brand single coated Schott glass filter is about 8-10X. The cost difference between a good name brand single coated Schott glass filter and a top of the line multi-coated Schott glass filter is is about 1.5-3X.
The need for good glass is a given in high quality optics. The basic glass needs to be clear with no inclusions and or flaws. Even filters using Schott glass can cause optical problems if the raw filter blank is not ground absolutely flat and parallel front and back and the finished filter mounted perpendicular to the lens in a good filter cell/mount.
The funny part IMO is that it makes little sense to use an inexpensive filter to protect an inexpensive scope. All you end up doing is making an inexpensive scope even worse optically. It makes even less sense to use an expensive precision multi-coated filter to protect an inexpensive scope. The reasoning is in the end at the VERY BEST all a good filter can do is do no harm to optical quality but even the very best optical filters degrade optical quality to some degree.
If I owned a moderate quality entry-level scope like a PST scope rather than spend $100 on a high-end filter I would spend that $100 on a good quality ARD. A good ARD can improve image quality by reducing unwanted reflections and flare which improves contrast. Another advantage of reducing spurious reflections is doing so reduces the chances of giving away position. A good quality ARD improves perceived optical quality because it is not a filter and has no transmissive optical surfaces. All filters reduce optical image quality, reduce light transmission and to some degree increase flare which reduces contrast.
Another thing to consider is that as the quality of the scope goes up so does the quality of the lens coatings. Top of the line scopes use hard top coatings on their optics to protect the delicate rare earth coatings from oxidation and scratching. The protective lens top coatings are harder than the glass they protect.
Knowing all this, by now hopefully you will no longer choose to remain ignorant.
Hope this helps you!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone try using a camera lens filter to protect your scopes lens form the elements? They come in all different sizes, along with colors including what referred to as UV. Its been awhile since I have done any photography but I don't think using the UV filter changed the f-stop much if any. Its more about saving the lens delicate glass which would be the same thing as protecting are scopes glass. A UV filter runs about $10 and when it get damaged, its a disposable item. </div></div>
Using inexpensive glass filters (that is to say non-Schott glass without high-end multi-coating) is bad idea for just about any use. Even on a moderate quality PST series scope poorly made filters can visibly reduce optical quality by adding flare and distortion. Flare reduces contrast which significantly reduces the usefulness of an optic. Flare is caused by several things but with filters the issue is multiple reflections between the surfaces (internally and air-to-air) of the filter and the objective lens. Flare in filters is primarily caused by using un-coated or poorly designed coatings and poorly aligned filter holders. These issues also affect a scope's internal optical design. Coatings and coating designs are one of the major distinctions between a top of the line scope and a so-so mid-line scope. Same issue of coatings applies to filters. The cost differences between a no-name brand uncoated green glass filter and a good name brand single coated Schott glass filter is about 8-10X. The cost difference between a good name brand single coated Schott glass filter and a top of the line multi-coated Schott glass filter is is about 1.5-3X.
The need for good glass is a given in high quality optics. The basic glass needs to be clear with no inclusions and or flaws. Even filters using Schott glass can cause optical problems if the raw filter blank is not ground absolutely flat and parallel front and back and the finished filter mounted perpendicular to the lens in a good filter cell/mount.
The funny part IMO is that it makes little sense to use an inexpensive filter to protect an inexpensive scope. All you end up doing is making an inexpensive scope even worse optically. It makes even less sense to use an expensive precision multi-coated filter to protect an inexpensive scope. The reasoning is in the end at the VERY BEST all a good filter can do is do no harm to optical quality but even the very best optical filters degrade optical quality to some degree.
If I owned a moderate quality entry-level scope like a PST scope rather than spend $100 on a high-end filter I would spend that $100 on a good quality ARD. A good ARD can improve image quality by reducing unwanted reflections and flare which improves contrast. Another advantage of reducing spurious reflections is doing so reduces the chances of giving away position. A good quality ARD improves perceived optical quality because it is not a filter and has no transmissive optical surfaces. All filters reduce optical image quality, reduce light transmission and to some degree increase flare which reduces contrast.
Another thing to consider is that as the quality of the scope goes up so does the quality of the lens coatings. Top of the line scopes use hard top coatings on their optics to protect the delicate rare earth coatings from oxidation and scratching. The protective lens top coatings are harder than the glass they protect.
Knowing all this, by now hopefully you will no longer choose to remain ignorant.
Hope this helps you!
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
+1 for ARD , got mine from TENEBREX here > http://www.camouflage.com/pdf/kf_prodpricelist_retail.pdf
+1 for ARD , got mine from TENEBREX here > http://www.camouflage.com/pdf/kf_prodpricelist_retail.pdf
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
buggas,
50mm is no longer a standard size, however if you look for a filter for a older Hassalblald lens they are 50mm. Enclosed is a link for one thats on eBay there are others places that should be able to find one for your scope. Hassalblald equipment if fairly easy to find.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hoya-B50-82A-Has...#ht_1696wt_1348
buggas,
50mm is no longer a standard size, however if you look for a filter for a older Hassalblald lens they are 50mm. Enclosed is a link for one thats on eBay there are others places that should be able to find one for your scope. Hassalblald equipment if fairly easy to find.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hoya-B50-82A-Has...#ht_1696wt_1348
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><<SNIPPED>>
Yaog
"If I owned a moderate quality entry-level scope like a PST scope rather than spend $100 on a high-end filter".
Sorry my moderate quality scope isn't good enough. But its all I could afford. I live on disability after 3 spine surgeries, all because someone couldn't be bothered with watching traffic.
I don't want an ADR, I'm only shooting paper and steel so reflection isn't a worry.
</div></div>
Get rid of that gigantic "I'm disabled" chip on your shoulder. I know plenty of people who are 100% disabled who still manage to make very good money and are very active. Obviously you are still shooting so you must still be able to move around on the surface of the planet. Your brain still works and you have internet access. The pity party doesn't fly with me and I'm not buying your sad sack story. Harsh? Maybe but if you can dish it out here in the ether you can eat it too.
I didn't say your PST scope was not good enough I said it was a "moderate quality entry-level scope" which is what the PST line is widely considered even by the company that markets the PST scopes. I didn't say you needed the anti-reflection feature I said if I had a modest quality scope I would try to improve my perceived scope image quality by using an ARD. It doesn't matter that you don't need anti-glint to shoot paper it matters because an ARD protects your scopes objective and improves perceived image quality in the real world. The real world is where I live.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: majohnson</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><<SNIPPED>>
Yaog
"If I owned a moderate quality entry-level scope like a PST scope rather than spend $100 on a high-end filter".
Sorry my moderate quality scope isn't good enough. But its all I could afford. I live on disability after 3 spine surgeries, all because someone couldn't be bothered with watching traffic.
I don't want an ADR, I'm only shooting paper and steel so reflection isn't a worry.
</div></div>
Get rid of that gigantic "I'm disabled" chip on your shoulder. I know plenty of people who are 100% disabled who still manage to make very good money and are very active. Obviously you are still shooting so you must still be able to move around on the surface of the planet. Your brain still works and you have internet access. The pity party doesn't fly with me and I'm not buying your sad sack story. Harsh? Maybe but if you can dish it out here in the ether you can eat it too.
I didn't say your PST scope was not good enough I said it was a "moderate quality entry-level scope" which is what the PST line is widely considered even by the company that markets the PST scopes. I didn't say you needed the anti-reflection feature I said if I had a modest quality scope I would try to improve my perceived scope image quality by using an ARD. It doesn't matter that you don't need anti-glint to shoot paper it matters because an ARD protects your scopes objective and improves perceived image quality in the real world. The real world is where I live.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
19Scout77, what are you like 12 years old? Surely you didn't think that by posting this at o'dark-thirty and deleting it that nobody would see it?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 19Scout77</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 19Scout77</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
This thread could REALLY use a picture of a Tac Ops rife...
</div></div>
So post a great photo of YOUR Tac-Ops rifle for us all to admire!
</div></div>
Just curious--do you guys fondle your Tac-ops before or after the circle-jerk?? Us mere mortals gotta know...
</div></div>
I don't know about you but fondling before saves me some clean up time and as you know a clean gun is a happy gun. We're always happy to add people to our circle but most folks don't shoot well enough so there is a tendency for them to keep to the larger more common circles. No disrespect to the other circles but you know the un-cut, GAP, APA etc.
I hope this helps you learn how to be and get a better jerk.
19Scout77, what are you like 12 years old? Surely you didn't think that by posting this at o'dark-thirty and deleting it that nobody would see it?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 19Scout77</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 19Scout77</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
This thread could REALLY use a picture of a Tac Ops rife...
</div></div>
So post a great photo of YOUR Tac-Ops rifle for us all to admire!
</div></div>
Just curious--do you guys fondle your Tac-ops before or after the circle-jerk?? Us mere mortals gotta know...
</div></div>
I don't know about you but fondling before saves me some clean up time and as you know a clean gun is a happy gun. We're always happy to add people to our circle but most folks don't shoot well enough so there is a tendency for them to keep to the larger more common circles. No disrespect to the other circles but you know the un-cut, GAP, APA etc.
I hope this helps you learn how to be and get a better jerk.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
If anybody but 19Scout77 doesn't see the humor in the post above please speak-up.
"Happiness is a warm gun... " The Beatles
Oh wait, that was the NRA! and yes I'm old enough to remember these ads.
If anybody but 19Scout77 doesn't see the humor in the post above please speak-up.
"Happiness is a warm gun... " The Beatles
Oh wait, that was the NRA! and yes I'm old enough to remember these ads.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
Busted...you caught me. I in fact posted and retracted...glad to see the 90 seconds it was up was not lost on you.
12...hardly, I don't think a 12yo would even know what a saltine is let alone what you do with it if you are last. I am more like an 8yo who really has his shit together.
It was only o'dark on the left coast, I was up dusting off my barrel and polishing my sling swivels for a photo shoot.
Busted...you caught me. I in fact posted and retracted...glad to see the 90 seconds it was up was not lost on you.
12...hardly, I don't think a 12yo would even know what a saltine is let alone what you do with it if you are last. I am more like an 8yo who really has his shit together.
It was only o'dark on the left coast, I was up dusting off my barrel and polishing my sling swivels for a photo shoot.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
Anyone can give the sizes for the common tactical scope objective len sizes? It would be easier than bringing my scopes and trying every filter size.
Anyone can give the sizes for the common tactical scope objective len sizes? It would be easier than bringing my scopes and trying every filter size.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries was trying to bootstrap the level of good basic information in the thread for anybody who comes to the thread later. The purpose of threads like this are to inform which Aries has done very well. </div></div>
A <span style="font-weight: bold">huge</span> +1 on that!
I'm always very grateful for those folks that are willing to spend their valuable time helping others (like me). It's the people who go that "extra mile" in assisting others that adds real value to a forum like this.
Thanks for posting detailed information that I'll be able to use instead of just wondering how it was done.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries was trying to bootstrap the level of good basic information in the thread for anybody who comes to the thread later. The purpose of threads like this are to inform which Aries has done very well. </div></div>
A <span style="font-weight: bold">huge</span> +1 on that!
I'm always very grateful for those folks that are willing to spend their valuable time helping others (like me). It's the people who go that "extra mile" in assisting others that adds real value to a forum like this.
Thanks for posting detailed information that I'll be able to use instead of just wondering how it was done.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: buffybuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone can give the sizes for the common tactical scope objective len sizes? It would be easier than bringing my scopes and trying every filter size. </div></div>
The problem is that all 56mm objectives do not use the same filter size or thread. You could bring in your scope shade/hood and get a filter that fits but if you read the thread you would see that an ARD is a better choice and solves more than one problem without creating another.
HTH!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: buffybuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone can give the sizes for the common tactical scope objective len sizes? It would be easier than bringing my scopes and trying every filter size. </div></div>
The problem is that all 56mm objectives do not use the same filter size or thread. You could bring in your scope shade/hood and get a filter that fits but if you read the thread you would see that an ARD is a better choice and solves more than one problem without creating another.
HTH!
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ledzep</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does the filter do for you? Keeps debris off of your objective lens?
Or are we worried about UV light degrading coatings and glass etc.?
</div></div>
The answer to your first question is in the subject line. The answer to your second question is that UV does not degrade lens coatings and glass.
HTH!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ledzep</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does the filter do for you? Keeps debris off of your objective lens?
Or are we worried about UV light degrading coatings and glass etc.?
</div></div>
The answer to your first question is in the subject line. The answer to your second question is that UV does not degrade lens coatings and glass.
HTH!
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: buffybuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone can give the sizes for the common tactical scope objective len sizes? It would be easier than bringing my scopes and trying every filter size. </div></div>
The problem is that all 56mm objectives do not use the same filter size or thread. You could bring in your scope shade/hood and get a filter that fits but if you read the thread you would see that an ARD is a better choice and solves more than one problem without creating another.
HTH! </div></div>
Yes, I know not all 56mm or 50mm objectives are the same, but if someone has got a filter for a NF 56 or 50mm, they could list it and for any other scopes they have gotten filters for.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: buffybuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone can give the sizes for the common tactical scope objective len sizes? It would be easier than bringing my scopes and trying every filter size. </div></div>
The problem is that all 56mm objectives do not use the same filter size or thread. You could bring in your scope shade/hood and get a filter that fits but if you read the thread you would see that an ARD is a better choice and solves more than one problem without creating another.
HTH! </div></div>
Yes, I know not all 56mm or 50mm objectives are the same, but if someone has got a filter for a NF 56 or 50mm, they could list it and for any other scopes they have gotten filters for.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
curious about a filter for a 6-24x50 PST myself....i have access to some Hassleblad's and many filters, but don't want to bother my coworker to dig one out if I'm not sure it'll work.
curious about a filter for a 6-24x50 PST myself....i have access to some Hassleblad's and many filters, but don't want to bother my coworker to dig one out if I'm not sure it'll work.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
if anyone finds out what fits a PM2 3-20x50 i'll be interested to find out
if anyone finds out what fits a PM2 3-20x50 i'll be interested to find out
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
Any optic is only as good as the worst lens in its system. Adding a cheap "filter" on something like a S&B seems a bit of a regression. Any additional glass/air surface will reduce light gathering. I fail to see that as a plus. Call one of the optic manufactures and see what they recommend.
Any optic is only as good as the worst lens in its system. Adding a cheap "filter" on something like a S&B seems a bit of a regression. Any additional glass/air surface will reduce light gathering. I fail to see that as a plus. Call one of the optic manufactures and see what they recommend.
Re: Using a Lens Filter to Protect your Scope's Lens
I'm sure if the top rifle scope manufacturers wanted you to use a lens filter they would've gave you one. Lord knows those scopes cost enough to get a free filter.
I'm sure if the top rifle scope manufacturers wanted you to use a lens filter they would've gave you one. Lord knows those scopes cost enough to get a free filter.
Similar threads
