Skylight 1B or UV filter, what's best for image quality?

Hi,

Still new to this lens thing. Freinds of mine tell me to get a filter to protect my lens. Now I see the thread about this on this forum. Myself I havnt yet used anything but I may try one to see for myself.

I assume multi coated is best and you get what you pay for.

What I'm not sure is should I get a "UV" or "SKYLIGHT 1B" freinds use both, but when I look through a 1B it makes things a little red/pink ish. I want to keep any change the filter might do to the lowest it can be. So I feel UV, what is everyones view.

My main reason for going down this route is my new L lens I dont want it scratched.

I also can get deals on Sigma filters so it will be one from the range they do (i'm lucky I know someone that knows someone who works for them!!!)

R

I'd encourage you to start by reading this article before spending any money on a filter simply for protection: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/​sm-feb-05.shtml

The answer to your question is that no filter is best for image quality. The color shift of the filter is not relevant when shooting digital, as you can change the color afterwards. These filters were designed for film cameras.

Personally, I never use filters, except maybe a polariser or grad once in a while. I've used cameras in all sorts of places for over 30 years and never has a scratch on a lens.

Use a lens hood (always!) and a lens cap in the bag, take some care and you'll be fine.

Repeat verything said above except make it over 40 years. I still have many of my lenses from the 1960's, and the glass in all of them is in nearly mint condition - after enough use to wear much of the outer finish off the lens bodies.

USE THE LENS HOOD......

So now that we have heard from all of the lucky (and/or cheap) ones, I'll throw in my pitch for a filter. You mentioned 'You get what you pay for', and that is true with filters. Don't put a $10 filter on a $500 lens - you will see the difference.

My personal choice is UV - it does not introduce a color shift like a skylight does. But if you like what the skylight does, go for it. In any case, pick one (UV or skylight) and stick with it for all your lenses so you get consistent results. I recommend Hoya, B+W, or one of the other quality suppliers. Multicoated is a good thing, and multicoated on the inside surface can be beneficial with digital to prevent reflections coming off of the sensor from causing flare.

This is like religion or politics, it can (and has) become the start of heated arguments. One argument for a filter that a hood can never make - a filter protects your glass all the time, not just when you have the hood mounted. If your lens cap is off (or comes off) in your bag and you have something else rattling around, the filter will protect the glass.

My 2 cents.

Have Fun,

I wholey agree. I have 3 or 4 58mm, and a 77mm UV filter I don't need. I should keep one of each size since I do have an EOS-3. Anyone want to buy the others?

Wish I had read this thread before ordering a skylight to go with my new Sigma 70-300 Apo!
Wicksy

Deleted. Read the suggested link. Stupid question.

Filters will come off. Thanks!

John

Thanks for all your posts, with my past digi-slr (fixed lens) and my other cameras in the past 20 years I have never scratched one myself. So I think I shall carry on without filters. I do make sure I take care of my kit, this is why I had the 350d over the 20d.

It was just my new 17-40L is the most I have ever had to pay for glass and it just got me thinking. The only one of course that will be on and off the camera will be a CP filter, which I need to order next week for the 77mm fit.

R