UV Filters
- Thread starter siman23
- Start date
puddleduck
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
We all know UV filters protect the front lens element.
Dis-agree.
Why is it some people do not use them to protect their expensive glass?
You've answered your own question. Why de-grade expensive glass with a cheap UV filter.
Do they affect image quality?
Yes
Dis-agree.
Why is it some people do not use them to protect their expensive glass?
You've answered your own question. Why de-grade expensive glass with a cheap UV filter.
Do they affect image quality?
Yes
StewartR
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Apparently, on Planet Puddleduck, this sort of thing never happens:
The front element was completely unmarked.
StewartR
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Who said anything about using cheap filters? The OP certainly didn't.
puddleduck
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Apparently, on Planet Puddleduck, this sort of thing never happens:
The front element was completely unmarked.
LOL! The filter just cracked from a drop, it wasn't speared by an impact I'm sure.
I'd expect a recessed element to be unmarked from a drop wouldn't you?
On Planet Puddleduck I use lens hoods and lens caps to protect my glass
BigLoada
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 269
- Name
- Dean
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I use mine when underground as mud always gets on it, I wouldnt take a lens down there without one. But when in a non-dangerous location such as taking landscapes or indoors or whatever I have started to remove it, especially for night photography.
steavyd
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 282
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Depends what you are shooting, being a Speedway Photographer they are a must, flying dirt everywhere, proved thier value to me on a couple of occasions, smashed filter but front element intact.
A nice clean filter does not affect the qualty of picture, not in my experience anyway.
A filter does degrade imagery but, is the protection worth the degradation?
I use a filter when I am in an area that has adverse conditions - blowing dust, sand and grit as well as water spray and rain. In fact some Canon lenses need filters in order to be weather resistant.
I tend to use filters more on wide lenses since their lens hoods (ALWAYS USE A HOOD - INSIDE AND OUT) don't protect the front elements as well as deep hoods for longer focal length lenses.
However, if you do use a filter for protection, the quality of the filter should match the quality of the lens. I would not necessarily buy a very expensive filter to protect either the Canon 18-55mm kit lens or a 50mm f/1.8 Mark-II. However, putting a cheap filter on a really expensive lens is silly because of the loss of image quality.
Outdoors, I am frequently using a polarizing filter which both protects the lens and adds to the image.
I use a filter when I am in an area that has adverse conditions - blowing dust, sand and grit as well as water spray and rain. In fact some Canon lenses need filters in order to be weather resistant.
I tend to use filters more on wide lenses since their lens hoods (ALWAYS USE A HOOD - INSIDE AND OUT) don't protect the front elements as well as deep hoods for longer focal length lenses.
However, if you do use a filter for protection, the quality of the filter should match the quality of the lens. I would not necessarily buy a very expensive filter to protect either the Canon 18-55mm kit lens or a 50mm f/1.8 Mark-II. However, putting a cheap filter on a really expensive lens is silly because of the loss of image quality.
Outdoors, I am frequently using a polarizing filter which both protects the lens and adds to the image.