Used Canon 50mm Lens Question

[jenyagute74]

Hi guys,

Recently got my camera and have been trying out different lenses. I've heard only good things about the EF 50mm lens so I decided to give it a go. I was ecstatic to find one for only $70 on ebay that seemed to be in good condition so I immediately scooped it up. However, after purchase I noticed a few brandings that I was unsure about. Either on the lens itself or on a filter attached to the lens it says B+W F-Pro. Is this a filter attached to the lens? Or did I get some weird version on the 50mm? I ask because I am completely new to this and the listing doesn't mention anything about a filter.I'm sure it is, just wanted to consult community.

Thanks!

[Ray-uk]

That is a filter that is attached to the front, the good news is that B&W make very good and quite expensive filters, the bad news is that you don't really need it on there and in some circumstances it could affect the quality of your pictures. A lot of people use them just to protect the front of the lens.

If you want to remove it then just unscrew it in an anticlockwise direction.

[rs-eos]

Do you know what specific filter it is?  I personally use the XS-Pro Clear filters and have had zero issues with picture quality.  I use these on my L-series glass as it'd be far cheaper to replace a busted filter than a front element.  But with such an inexpensive lens, this becomes far less an issue.

If the filter you have is of the UV variety, I say ditch it.

Bonus if you ended up with a circular polarizer or even ND.  Those can be very useful but not something you need attached to the lens all the time.

[wq9nsc]

I keep clear filters on the front of all my smaller lens because I shoot a lot of sports and with the filter in place I am not concerned about doing a quick field cleaning or casually wiping off moisture in the middle of a game.  I would have to be much more careful if it were the front element exposed rather than a relatively inexpensive filter.  My big L primes are rear filter type due to the size of the front element but they always have their very long lens hoods in place for protection when shooting and the front element in these lenses has a tough outer coating to make cleaning easier and the front element in most of these is considered "sacrificial" in that it is not an optically complex piece and is far less expensive to replace than the other elements.

I have yet to run into a situation where a properly coated good quality clear glass front filter produces any noticeable loss of image quality.  I am sure they may be a few specialized situations where this can occur but much of the concern over degradation from a good clear filter is in the same category as audiofools who claim that they can hear the difference between gear fed by a cryogenically treated oxygen free power cord versus a regular power cord 🙂 

Given all of the unexpected stuff that can happen to a lens that is used rather than kept on a shelf, having a protective clear "filter" in place is good cheap insurance and makes lens care simpler.

Rodger

[shadowsports]

@jenyagute74,

My advice.  Don't buy lenses from eBay.  New or used, gray-market, hidden damage, etc.

Doing so is like gambling.  You'll win some and you'll lose some (probably more) in time and money over the long run.  Choice is yours.     

[ebiggs1]

"If the filter you have is of the UV variety, I say ditch it."

That is bad advice. B+W is the "top" choice brand of filters. However, the 50mm f1.8 is so cheap it isn't usually good monetary sense to spend the bucks on one.  But now that you have it, use it. If it should in rare, very rare, cases, it might cause an issue simply remove it and then replace it when through. One thing most people seem to forget is, filters come off as easily as they go on.

No matter what others may think about using a UV filter, they can help in certain circumstances and they rarely hurt.

BTW, it is B+W, not B&W.

[Ray-uk]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

BTW, it is B+W, not B&W.

---

The B+W filter manufacturing company was founded in Berlin in 1947 by business partners Biermann and Weber, so although they are marketed under the logo B+W using the term B&W is not grammatically incorrect.

[ebiggs1]

However, it is not their logo and what is printed on their filters. It is confusing enough for new people with to adding to it.

[Ray-uk]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

 It is confusing enough for new people with to adding to it.

---

Well we don't want to make photography too easy otherwise everyone will be doing it

[ebiggs1]

Good point!