Did a stupid thing yesterday and got a nice oily fingerprint on a new lens

So I went out to Blacks and bought some cheap $6 cleaning kit. It came with a cleaning solution and some cleaning "tissues". I followed the direction and cleaned the lens. It looks very clean, but if I angle it just right and reflect the light on it a certain way, I can kind of make out some streaks from the cleaning solution.

Is this a problem?

Also, just wondering how often one should clean their lens.

 

If you have marks that are staying on the lens, that might be something to get checked out at a specialty camera store or something. They may have some kind of cleaner that will get it off.

Question - do you have any kind of filter on it? What I did almost right away is put a UV filter on - with the primary purpose being protection of the lens. I clean that once in a while but it stays surprisingly clean, I think it also helps because I leave the hood on. But its great because if anything happens to the glass part, its just the filter that gets affected.

 

I dunno, something about putting a cheap piece of glass in front of my expensive glass bothers me.

I dont have marks on my lens, its more like residue or streaks from the cleaner. If I clean it again, the streaks can be cleaned but then there are streaks in other places. I cant seem to get it 100% pristine

But again, i need to really look hard and angle the lens to the light a very specific way to see the streaks.

 

hmm.. I've wondered about that too but I feel like it wouldn't make a noticeable difference. I'm using a Tiffen UV. Maybe I should try shooting without it one night. I think the insurance it provides is worth more to me than any possible trade-off in the pics.

 

Just use a microfiber cloth (the ones you use for cleaning eye glasses). That should remove the streaks.

 

That's why you put an expensive piece of glass in front of your expensive glass. Both Hoya and B+W make quality protective filters. You pay for it though.

 

$80 Filter to protect a $500-$1000 lens, FTW

 

What lens did you get?

 

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/1750_diII_a016.asp

 

So I did some reading on this topic earlier today and the common consensus was that a UV filter causes "flare" when shooting into bright light - but it offers protection for lenses. I like the flare, especially for club shots . It may or may not be applicable to you based on conditions. While I don't have the top-of-the-line filter I don't think mine is "cheap" either. I guess I'm just too iffy about leaving the lens exposed in the club. It really has a lot to do with where you shoot. The next time I shoot at home though, I will take the filter off.

 

YAY for the 17-50.

The flare is a problem sometimes, Especially with long exposures at night, I always take it off for that. Usually you got off reflections of the light off the sensor, onto the filter, and back to the sensor.

I have a cheaper filter, and it never really bothered me. Especially after a small cousin threw a rock at the beach and hit it dead on, or when I dropped the 70-200 on highway 1, or when...

 

Yep, I can attest to falling victim to flare even with a quality filter. I got so wrapped up in the moment when taking this image that I forgot to take the filter off even though I knew better. I still kick myself for this one. This was through an expensive el-premo Hoya filter too.



The other thing filters will kill is the starburst effect you get be shooting directly into the sun with the smallest possible aperture.

 

yea that is why i took off my cheapo canon UV filters, im only putting those on when im in a situation where my lens could get damaged, example was when i was in mexico at the sand dunes, so much sand was flying around, glad i had the filter on

 

i clean with Zeiss Lens Cloths, and polish with a optical grade micro fiber. (same as I do for my eye glasses)

you can get the Zeiss cloths at Walmart for $2, box of 50. they work great, especially for the price.

 

so as of yesterday, I am UV-filter-less... curious to see how this weekend's shots turn out, if there's any (noticeable) difference.

 

It would have been a great shot if the flare was not present.
Did the attached filter create the bleeding of the lower part of the sun as well?

 

I think the garbage directly off of the lower part of the Sun was caused by the filter. On the full sized image, you can see that the "spot" is somewhat hexagonal in shape. When the flare takes on the shape of the aperture opening like that, it's usually indicative of internal reflections among the lens elements. Or so I've read.

BTW - I've always found it interesting how the camera (10D at the time) blew out to yellow in this shot instead of blowing out equally to white.

 

my pics seem to be noticeably better...

 

care to elaborate?

 

oops missed this.. well, I don't know for sure yet. maybe its my eyes playing tricks on me.. i don't know.

btw.. is the ring in this pic caused by the UV filter? if so, I'll miss it...