Marcio Watanabe wrote in message <347bf82b.2210991@news.primenet.com>...
>"Fred Whitlock" wrote:
>>Canon50E wrote in article
>><19971122223001.RAA11336@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>>> Hi, I would like to know if there is a significant difference between a
>>> multicoated filter and a one without. I personally use Hoya filters, and
>>> deciding whether to replace the UV(0) filter for a HMC UV (0). Is this a
>>> good choice??

>>It will make no difference whatsoever. The purpose of the UV filter is to
>>protect the lens, not to filter anything. Either one will protect your
>>lens as well as the other. Good shooting.

>If you shoot light sources (e.g. street lights, sun, moon), the
>difference between my HMC UV(0) and Canon UV (or Tiffen protector
>which are not multicoated) is many times visible in the viewfinder.
>There is less risk of flare with the multicoated filter. Actually,
>there is even less risk without filters which is what I do now
>whenever shooting light sources.


Check to see if the Canon/Tiffen are coated at all... There is a
MUCH bigger difference between uncoated filters and single-coated
than between single-coated and multi-coated... For virtually all
purposes, Fred was right - you will not see the difference between
the latter two (except possibly under the conditions you describe).
BTW, often what appear to be lens reflections actually are
viewfinder artifacts. If you have the camera on a tripod, you can
check for this by moving your eye sideways in the finder - if the
reflections move, they are just in the finder optics...
Hope This Helps
David Ruether - http://www.fcinet.com/ruether