Did I waste my money with 72 filters for FZ20?

[arvadajames]

I recently purchased the FZ20 and also bought high quality 72 mm filters - UV, HD, and circular polarizer. I have read so much on this sight about how you should not use the panasonic lense hood adapater and 72mm filters, but you should buy a seperate adapter and use smaller filters. So my question is does the extra distance that the panasonic adapter sits away from the lens and the extra diamater of the filter going to result in subpar photos, or is it more a matter of the smaller filters being cheaper? Should I try to recoup some of my investment by selling my filters on ebay, and buy a different adapter and smaller filters, while they are still brand new or am I ok with the set up that I have?

[FZ20knowitall]

I am in the same boat. I have a bunch of 72mm filters now that I usually don't use. But I got the 81A,B & C filters (they add warmth to portrait photography - C being the most, A being the least). A skylight filter is a watered down 81A filter. So my 72mm UV and Skylight are just sitting around, but when I shoot in my studio I just screw the 72mm to my phayee adapter (and I leave the 62mm UV filter attached). There is no noticeable loss in quality and the pictures have the warmth I am looking for. You probably could get away with using your polarizer in the same way, but it would probably be better to sell them, get the Phayee adapter (e-mail rongjin@phayee.com and order one). I strongly recommend this adapter, when you get it you will see. It is metal, it is solid and it looks like Panasonic made it specifically for that camera. It comes with a 72mm extension tube, so it pretty much looks like it did when you had the panasonic tube attached, but you screw on your filter to the 62mm thread which is right in front of the lens. I also have the Peramaal adapter and it is very plasticky and boxy, and it is a further distance from the lens. So my advice is, get the adapter and a good 62mm UV filter. I got the 62mm Hoya Pro1 Super HMC Multi-coated UV-Haze filter thanks to someones recommendation, and it is a great filter, and it is very thin which is also a plus. Then try out your polarizer. And I don't know what an HD filter is but you can try it out at the end of your Phayee adapter (which is 72mm like the panasonic). If it doesn't suffice, then sell the filters and get all 62mm filters.

[Jim Last]

You could always sell your 72mm filters on eBay :)

[Anex]

This is mainly why I didn't buy any filters right after getting the camera...well, I did buy the tiffen 72mm 812 warming filter as I take a lot indoor pics of my son as he goes about his business (he's 16 months old and the main source of my pics). After reading coutless posts here, especially by FZ20knowitall (thanks man), I just ordered the Phayee adapter. I was rather fortunate, however, as I just bought the camera and filter so the store is allowing me to exchange it for a series of 62mm versions (Hoya UV-Haze Pro Multi-coated, Color Polarizer, and 812 warming filter).

From what I've been reading, it's not the size of the filter (diameter wise) that's the problem but rather that the Panasonic adapter is just too long, creating opportunity for glare as the light has all that room to bounce around. At least, that's how my noobie photography brain understands it.

[arvadajames]

What if I purchased one of the aftermarket adapters that are 62 mm and put a 62mm to 72mm step up ring and then my 72 mm filters? How would that work? I am really trying not to have to sale my 72 mm filters and buy new 62 mm ones.

[HawkeyeLonewolf]

What if I purchased one of the aftermarket adapters that are 62 mm and put a 62mm to 72mm step up ring and then my 72 mm filters? How would that work? I am really trying not to have to sale my 72 mm filters and buy new 62 mm ones.

You would get vignetting (black circular "tunnel vision") when at wide angles by doing that.

[John_Reed]

You would get vignetting (black circular "tunnel vision") when at wide angles by doing that.I doubt that. I'm shooting through a 55mm stepdown ring (and a Pemaraal PD62 adapter) when I either use my Nikon 6T or TCON-17, and the 55mm ring induces no vignetting at wideangle (without a lens mounted); the FZ20 uses the same lens, so the same should hold true for it. On the other hand, I don't use any filters, so what do I know? :o

[pwiles1968]

I can not understand why people are buying Warm up and similar filters for Digital Cameras, I can understand ND, Polarising and UV. But effects filter's :confused: , there is a setting in the camera for warm and cool, and at the end of the day it can be tweaked in a Photo Editor anyway :rolleyes: .

[Jim Last]

I am sure there are many out there recently or just migrating from 'Film' to 'Digital' :) and it is a bit of a learning curve.

As they say, old habits and all that :D

Those more use to 'Digital' are probably just caught in a gadget frenzy!

Paul I agree with you, in that, the main effect that can't be recrated on a PC is 'Polarisation'. And the UV or Skylight is nothing much more than a see through lens cap.

[lozw]

I can not understand why people are buying Warm up and similar filters for Digital Cameras, I can understand ND, Polarising and UV. But effects filter's :confused: , there is a setting in the camera for warm and cool, and at the end of the day it can be tweaked in a Photo Editor anyway :rolleyes: .

I was going to comment the same.
Why buy those sort of filters when the same effect is so easily added in editing.
Surely it is better to start with as neutral a picture as possible so you can add any filter effect in post processing

[HawkeyeLonewolf]

I was going to comment the same.
Why buy those sort of filters when the same effect is so easily added in editing.
Surely it is better to start with as neutral a picture as possible so you can add any filter effect in post processing

It all depends on how "pure" you want to be.

The advantage to digital, IMO, is the ability to take many more pictures, storage, instant viewing of results (vs. developing), etc. I've always wanted to be an amateur photographer, but never could afford it in money or patience. :) With digital I can do this.

So the ultimate "purity" would still be on film. But being able to capture a shot without post-production would still be better, I think, than manipulating it after the fact.

Cropping is one thing, but altering the picture for saturation, brightness, etc. just seems like cheating to me. Sure I'd do it to make sure the picture looked like I wanted to, but there would not be anywhere near the same satisfaction as taking the picture myself.

Why not just remove a tree that you didn't want? Or add a person? See what I mean? Editing the content of the photo moves closer to graphic design and away from photography, IMO.

Admitedly there would be times when realism is not what is desired -- but that manipulation would occur on a real photo as well (after scanning).

So it just depends on how much satisfaction you want from your photography skills.

[arvadajames]

Thanks for all of your responses. I am able to return the filters (less a 10% restocking fee to the filter connection (www.2filters.com) and buy 62 mm filters. Is the Phayee adapter the best one? and do I need a seperate lense hood for long tele shooting? If so, which one? Again, thanks for all of the advice.