UV Filter 17-55 f/2.8

[Saxi]

I've taken the side of not using filters on any of my lenses for three reasons. First it is cheaper, second I am very careful with my equipment, and finally because I don't want any degration of IQ.

I've been reconsidering this recently and I do not want to get into a chicken or the egg discussion about this as I know each camp has their reasons. I've had my 17-55 f/2.8 for less than four months and I only casually shoot with it (once a twice a week I shoot, and every other shoot I will use the 17-55) and have already had to send the lens to Canon because of lots of white specs in the front of the lens. I was starting to see it again already after a few weeks, but I had to send it in anyway because it appears there is a small nick from when they had it the first time.

I was considering putting a B+W multi coded UV Haze filter on it to stop the dust, but I was also curious if it would provide any improvement to shooting on sunny days. I shoot candid so I rarely have the opportunity to do much more than a 580EX II with lighting, and I have been shooting on sunny days a lot recently. Will a good UV Haze filter help at all to minimize the over exposure you get in "hot" areas of a photo? I was considering picking up a similar filter for my 70-200 as I frequently use this when taking my son to local water parks on sunny days.

[Kaigler]

I have this filter on my 17-55 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/23735-REG/Hoya_A77UV_77mm_Ultraviolet_UV_0_Haze.html

I just got my lens this week and have already noticed a piece of dust on the back element. So I don't think a filter will prevent dust from getting into the lens but hopefully it will help. When you sent your lens in was it because you were noticing loss in IQ or just peaved that the dust was in there?

[Saxi]

I have this filter on my 17-55 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/23735-REG/Hoya_A77UV_77mm_Ultraviolet_UV_0_Haze.html

I just got my lens this week and have already noticed a piece of dust on the back element. So I don't think a filter will prevent dust from getting into the lens but hopefully it will help. When you sent your lens in was it because you were noticing loss in IQ or just peaved that the dust was in there?

It was a new lens and it looked like someone ripped a cotton napkin inside the front element. I thought it was a one time thing in fact I thought it came that way but when I bought it, I was going on vacation and they only had one. It didn't effect IQ, but I wanted to fix it since it was a new lens. It worked way better after I got it back, they said there was condensation in there as well. I sent it back though when I noticed it looks like there is a nick in it the front or just stubborn dust but it looks like it reflects light so I think it is a nick. It wasn't nicked when I sent it in and I didn't drop it or hit the element ever.

[NYPhotog]

A UV filter will provide zero benefits in terms improved IQ. And, if you choose to use a filter for protection, purchase only the best. IMO that would be either a B+W F-Pro MRC http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11994-REG/B_W_66070252_77mm_UV_Haze_010.html or Hoya HD http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/574276-REG/Hoya_XHD77UV_77mm_Ultraviolet_UV_Haze.html

[rklepper]

I would get the B+W and avoid the Hoya.

A UV filter will provide zero benefits in terms improved IQ. And, if you choose to use a filter for protection, purchase only the best. IMO that would be either a B+W F-Pro MRC http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11994-REG/B_W_66070252_77mm_UV_Haze_010.html or Hoya HD http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/574276-REG/Hoya_XHD77UV_77mm_Ultraviolet_UV_Haze.html

[Kaigler]

I have a cheap $20 dollar Hoya on my 70-200 but took it off today. I haven't been getting the results out of the lens that I would have expected. I'm thinking that might be the culprit. My 17-55 seems much sharper with a better filter. My friend told me that the Hoya $20 filters would do....learning that is NOT the case. But he uses kit lenses only atm....

[Saxi]

I have a cheap $20 dollar Hoya on my 70-200 but took it off today. I haven't been getting the results out of the lens that I would have expected. I'm thinking that might be the culprit. My 17-55 seems much sharper with a better filter. My friend told me that the Hoya $20 filters would do....learning that is NOT the case. But he uses kit lenses only atm....

Judging by your gear, I don't think you want to take advice from someone with a kit lens :)

I used to use a cheap $20 filter when I shot with my 18-55 non-IS kit lens with my XT & XTi, but I stopped when I upgraded to a 50D and bought the nicer lenses I own now.

[NYPhotog]

I would get the B+W and avoid the Hoya.

And why is that?

[Jon]

Hoyas have a well-earned reputation for being difficult to clean. There are reports they've got a new, easier-to-clean, coating on their latest filter line, but I'll let someone else test it.

[NYPhotog]

Hoyas have a well-earned reputation for being difficult to clean. There are reports they've got a new, easier-to-clean, coating on their latest filter line, but I'll let someone else test it.

OK, I'm that "someone". Having used several brands of filters over the years, lately I have mostly used B+W. However, about six months ago I tried the new Hoya HD filters and I think that they are at least as good, and in some cases better, that B+W (BTW, IMO Heliopan filters are over-hyped and over rated).

The Hoya HD coatings are very hard and very easy to clean. Optically, the UV filters are as good as the B+W. I think the Hoya HD CPL filters are, in some respects, better than B+W. Again, the coatings are excellent and the lubricants are better than B+W (will not bind in extremely cold weather). Light transmission of the Hoya is also excellent. The Hoya HD mount is aluminum ally vs. brass of the B+W, but the Hoya mounts are thinner than the B+W F-Pro. They are as thin as the B+W Slim CPL, but have front threads, unlike the B+W Slim.

[stevo8]

I have the hoya HD on mine and it works pretty dang good. Tried to make it cause flare and compare to not using one and there was no noticable difference really and I almost wanna say that there was less flare with it on.

[ed rader]

OK, I'm that "someone". Having used several brands of filters over the years, lately I have mostly used B+W. However, about six months ago I tried the new Hoya HD filters and I think that they are at least as good, and in some cases better, that B+W (BTW, IMO Heliopan filters are over-hyped and over rated).

The Hoya HD coatings are very hard and very easy to clean. Optically, the UV filters are as good as the B+W. I think the Hoya HD CPL filters are, in some respects, better than B+W. Again, the coatings are excellent and the lubricants are better than B+W (will not bind in extremely cold weather). Light transmission of the Hoya is also excellent. The Hoya HD mount is aluminum ally vs. brass of the B+W, but the Hoya mounts are thinner than the B+W F-Pro. They are as thin as the B+W Slim CPL, but have front threads, unlike the B+W Slim.


i think the new kenko filters are very good too. i also use B+W filters and see no difference between hi-end hoya, kenko or B+W. i generally buy whichever is cheapest, which is rarely B+W :D.

ed rader

[Ralph Merlino]

All I ever use is B+W, have for thirty years.