- This topic is empty.
Protecting lenses with filters ?
-
Thinking about getting some UV screw filters for one or two of my lenses
for when I’m photographing on the coast/beach where sand is a factor.2 questions really:
1) Should I even bother due to the impact to quality they may have ?
2) If I should get some, what’s the best brand out there ?Cheers
I personally have never used them since I started and have never damaged the front element of any of my lenses (taking pictures now about 10 years). It all depends on how careful you are with you camera lenses I think. If you?re careful you don?t need a filter. Even if you do bang the front element there is no guarantee that the filter will protect the element anyhow. For me I always do two things to protect the front element. 1) Keep the hood on at all times this will give it some protection and break the fall or lighten the bang. 2) Always carry the camera with the lens pointing down. Do not carry the camera with the lens sticking out horizontally.
If you are going to buy UV filters B+W I think are good but expensive
Martin
Thanks Martin, yep I’m careful and always have the hood on as you suggest. Looks like
I’m doing something right :Dcheers
In most cases a lens hood will provide more than enough protection to the lens. And a small scratch on a front lens element will degrade an image far less than a filter will. At the end of the day everybody has to weigh up the potential risks and benefits for themselves.
The case against using a UV filter is made very well in the The Filter Flare Factor article.
One scenario where I would consider using a protection filter is during heavy rain or whilst doing any marine photography, where you end up having to wipe the lens so often that you’re probably better off wiping a filter.
Thanks Thorsten,
I might get a couple of filters for times when there is some fine mist coming in off the waves.
Its a pain getting the fine salty droplets on the glass. Bit worried that it might do some damage,
then again my 18-70 which I had been using up to now shows no signs of it.anyhow, thanks guys, some stuff to think about there.
Mark
As above really, don’t fit a filter other than for a specific purpose, one being if you’re likely toget sea spray on the front element. There is a possibility of damaging the coating or getting fine grit stuck to it. Minor scratches aren’t usually an issue, although smears and fine scratches can increase flare/ghosting.
Si
Hi Mark – I was using a UV filter until recently when it was pointed out to me that it is really just a cheap piece of glass in front of a rather expensive piece of glass, so I removed it and now just use a lens hood…
I recenty posted an answer to this very question on Amateur Photography forums.
My reply was partly meant to wind some people up over there (and worked) but you might enjoy reading it.
My own opinion.Forget about protective skylight or UV filters full stop.
You don’t need the old kind and you certainly don’t need the new “digital” kind.
The protective filter is aimed squarely at the photographer that spends more time polishing his lenses than taking photographs. Lenses are tools and they will get wrecked, protected or not. If your gear isn’t getting wrecked then you’re not trying hard enough.
If it’s valuable then insure it. If it’s being used in amateur capacity then your home insurance might cover it anyway.
Why put something in front of a lens that is just going to contribute to flare and performance loss. Unless it has a real function like a polariser or grad.
Andy
I personaly feel that any good photographer should have at the minium a circular polarizer. UV and graduated filters work well for the folks who still shoot film. UV filters and the like can be added in post processing.
Nothing brings out the blue of the sky like a circular polarizer :)
IrishBrian wrote:
UV filters and the like can be added in post processing.
but does a UV filter not cut out that haze you get in landscape shots?
trailfox wrote:
IrishBrian wrote:
UV filters and the like can be added in post processing.
but does a UV filter not cut out that haze you get in landscape shots?
Good point I suppose, but I was always taught that a UV filter is nothing more than a expensive lens cover.
On bright days the circular polarizer cuts out the haze and glare and can “protect” your exposure and help keep highlights from being blown out like. the sky.
If you have a bight blue sky or water and it’s bright out then a circular polarizer will help eliminate the glare often associated with this type of shot.
I dropped my camera with the 50/1.4 looking downwards once and only the UV filter was broken and deformed after the accident. I’m not sure what would have happened if it didn’t dumpen the fall. I’m quite rough with my equipment, because it’s just equipment for me, not a girlfriend, so I think, a UV filter AND the hood is the least what I have to use to protect the lens from myself. Also, cleaning a filter from the salty-oily seawater is much easier than cleaning the front element of the Nikkor 18-70 for example.
It’s all up to you, if you haven’t had problems so far, don’t bother with it, spend the money on traveling instead.randomway wrote:
It’s all up to you, if you haven’t had problems so far, don’t bother with it, spend the money on traveling instead.
TAXI !
I have always used UV and or clear glass on all my glass. They are cheap and have in the past saved my front element. At work I just had to replace a front element on a HD lens and it cost $1500 U.S. and $250 labor. The lens list for $ 32,000.00 and we paid about $28,000.00 for it. The 127mm round screw in filter cost $ 299.00 and again I would rather replace a filter rather than a front element any day. Here on this side of the pond I can get a UV or clear filter for protection for about $7-$14 dollars if I do not buy new. My vote is for protection rather than a “oh crap I wish I would have…………”
I just ordered and got in a 22×7.8, 1.8 zoom and the first thing I got for it was a filter. ………that lens was cheap…only $19,000.00 :shock:
Just me two cents worth.
I always used them up till a month or so ago. I don’t use them now when shooting criticial stuff like weddings, and yes I notice a difference in sharpness. But in the past when shooting F1, I did drop a few lenses and only the filter saved the front element, so they can come in handy.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
