Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 16 Jan 2012 (Monday) 11:36
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Lens protection filter; Yes or No?

 
Plumtreelad
Senior Member
Avatar
270 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Nottingham, England
     
Jan 16, 2012 11:36 |  #1

I have been reading a number of threads recently and I have seen one or two that suggest not having a lens cover to protect the lens from scratches because it can adversely affect the IQ of the picture and reduce light. I have a UV filter and I am wondering if I should remove it and rely on the lens hood. Views please before I go and do something potentially very silly.


5D Mk III|7D |1DmkIV |10 -22 |24 -105 F4 IS L | 35 F2 IS | 70-200 F2.8 IS II L | 85 1.8 | 300 F2.8 IS MK II L|1.4 Extender MK III |
flickr (external link)
david kissman photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Veemac
Goldmember
2,098 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Arizona, USA
     
Jan 16, 2012 11:44 |  #2

You can look forward to at least a 5-page debate on this topic (it happens every time), but you can start off by reading the Protective Filter FAQ which is in the Lenses section of the board.


Mac
-Stuff I Use-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timbop
Goldmember
Avatar
2,980 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 17
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Southern New Jersey, USA
     
Jan 16, 2012 12:28 |  #3

Veemac wrote in post #13713451 (external link)
You can look forward to at least a 5-page debate on this topic (it happens every time), but you can start off by reading the Protective Filter FAQ which is in the Lenses section of the board.

Yes, this is one of the classic religious debates :lol:


Current: 5DM3, 6D, 8mm fish, 24-105/4IS, 35/2IS, 70-200/2.8IS, 85/1.8, 100-400/IS v1, lensbaby composer with edge 80, 580's and AB800's
Formerly: 80D, 7D, 300D, 5D, 5DM2, 20D, 50D, 1DM2, 17-55IS, 24-70/2.8, 28-135IS, 40/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 70-200/4IS, 70-300IS, 70-200/2.8, 100 macro, 400/5.6, tammy 17-50 and 28-75, sigma 50 macro & 100-300

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,642 posts
Likes: 131
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 16, 2012 12:35 |  #4

Not for me, I use the hood for protection. If I'm in blowing dust/sand I'll put a clear filter on.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 541
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Jan 16, 2012 15:54 |  #5

I use lens hoods -- they both protect from the occasional bumps but also help to block unwanted glare.

As for "UV/protective" filters, well, they add nothing to the image but can cause unwanted glare/flare. In the film days, the "UV" filter served a purpose, but with digital we have a built-in filter that serves the purpose.

As has been said, at times such as windy, dusty conditions (or maybe windy ocean scenes) a filter can come in handy, but for my normal photography the hood does its job. If my gear took a real pounding, well, I doubt that a UV filter would help!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Attomsk
Member
Avatar
152 posts
Joined Dec 2011
     
Jan 16, 2012 16:10 |  #6

No, unless you are in a sandstorm.


My flickr (external link) | 600D gripped | Σ17-50 2.8 OS | 50 1.8 | 70-200L f4 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Plumtreelad
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
270 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Nottingham, England
     
Jan 16, 2012 17:10 as a reply to  @ Attomsk's post |  #7

OK, there is a theme emerging here and it seems to suggest that I should take off the uv filter and trust that the hood will do its job. Thanks everyone.


5D Mk III|7D |1DmkIV |10 -22 |24 -105 F4 IS L | 35 F2 IS | 70-200 F2.8 IS II L | 85 1.8 | 300 F2.8 IS MK II L|1.4 Extender MK III |
flickr (external link)
david kissman photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davisphotos
Member
190 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Portsmouth, NH
     
Jan 16, 2012 17:52 |  #8

You may be inadvertently starting a religious war, I find UV lenses to be a waste, I've found my lens hoods to be much more helpful.


Maine Wedding Photographer Andrew Davis (external link)
New England Commercial Photography (external link)
Andrew Davis Photography Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
goldboughtrue
Goldmember
1,857 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Colorado
     
Jan 16, 2012 17:55 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

You will not get a consensus on this. It is split 50/50 whether to use UV filters. There are a ton of threads on the subject.


http://www.pbase.com/g​oldbough (external link)

5D II, Canon 100 macro, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 24-105 L, Canon TS-E 45, Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Plumtreelad
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
270 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Nottingham, England
     
Jan 17, 2012 03:36 as a reply to  @ goldboughtrue's post |  #10

I have looked through earlier threads and I do not see a 50 50 split. I have assessed it as 70% - no lens cover and 30% - lens cover. This is backed up by the very small sample here (4!) that shows almost everyone saying no lens cover


5D Mk III|7D |1DmkIV |10 -22 |24 -105 F4 IS L | 35 F2 IS | 70-200 F2.8 IS II L | 85 1.8 | 300 F2.8 IS MK II L|1.4 Extender MK III |
flickr (external link)
david kissman photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 154
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Jan 17, 2012 03:59 |  #11

Plumtreelad wrote in post #13718031 (external link)
I have looked through earlier threads and I do not see a 50 50 split. I have assessed it as 70% - no lens cover and 30% - lens cover. This is backed up by the very small sample here (4!) that shows almost everyone saying no lens cover

A filter is not a "lens cover". You were provided with a lens cover (or lens cap) with your lens. A filter is designed to remove certain elements from the light going through it.

What you should do is perform a fair test of YOUR clear filter to see if it causes problems with images when mounted to YOUR lens and camera.

Choose a scene that is backlit with the sun either slightly in or just out of the scene. Put the camera on a solid tripod and make two exposures with the same settings, one with and one without the filter attached. See if you can see any difference in the images. What I expect is that the shot with the filter will have less contrast, more flare, and poorer colors than the shot without the filter.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Plumtreelad
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
270 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Nottingham, England
     
Jan 17, 2012 04:28 as a reply to  @ SkipD's post |  #12

Thanks SkipD for the clarification of the terms being used. Yes, I will do as you suggest. I do however detect that you also believe that an uncovered lens will produce a better result!?
Indeed, the major failing that I have at the moment, that I was blaming on the 7D, was the lack of contrast and poor colours in my photos. I was becoming a 7D "Basher" and maybe now I will uncover the real reason for the poor IQ


5D Mk III|7D |1DmkIV |10 -22 |24 -105 F4 IS L | 35 F2 IS | 70-200 F2.8 IS II L | 85 1.8 | 300 F2.8 IS MK II L|1.4 Extender MK III |
flickr (external link)
david kissman photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JAE ­ Photography
Member
108 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Sep 2011
     
Jan 17, 2012 06:57 |  #13

I just put one on at the beach. Sand sucks.


http://www.modelmayhem​.com/1926140 (external link)
http://www.jae-photography.net/ (external link) (nsfw)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mguffin
Goldmember
Avatar
2,627 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 17
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Allendale, NJ
     
Jan 17, 2012 06:59 |  #14

Hood and a rocket blower... unless your at the beach...


Mike
Nikon D800 ~ Nikon D500
Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG ~ Nikkor 50 f/1.8G ~ Nikkor 85 f/1.8G ~ Nikkor 12-24 f/4 DX ~ Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 DX ~ Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR ~ Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 DC ~ Sigma 50-100 f/1.8 DC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Emergency ­ Exit
Member
223 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Sentani, Indonesia
     
Jan 17, 2012 07:10 |  #15

Here's the deal. I use both. (Woohoo, haha!)

I would be fine with a UV filter for protection as long as it's not a cheapo, high-reflection one. I also try to get a hood for every lens I get (Thank you Canon for not including a hood on the 18-135! :rolleyes:).


Emergency Exit Pictures (external link)
EOS 60D Gripped | EF 70-200 f/4L IS USM | EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS | Speedlite 430EX II
Full Goodies List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,161 views & 0 likes for this thread
Lens protection filter; Yes or No?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Dman780
976 guests, 267 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.