How many of u use a UV filter?

Hoods always, filters never (apart from CPL / ND for effect on occasion).

I've never seen the point of filters for "protection", there are precious few situations where they will do anything to protect the lens, but can cause damage when they shatter and the sharp glass scratches your front element.

I don't treat my gear carefully and haven't damaged the front element yet, in over 30 years. During that time I would have broken lots of filters, so I have probably saved myself the price of 2 nice L lenses in that time by not wasting it on thin slivers of glass to use as cannon fodder.

^ that.

sandpiper wrote in post #14657911
Hoods always, filters never (apart from CPL / ND for effect on occasion).

I've never seen the point of filters for "protection", there are precious few situations where they will do anything to protect the lens, but can cause damage when they shatter and the sharp glass scratches your front element.

I don't treat my gear carefully and haven't damaged the front element yet, in over 30 years. During that time I would have broken lots of filters, so I have probably saved myself the price of 2 nice L lenses in that time by not wasting it on thin slivers of glass to use as cannon fodder.

I'd say there are plenty conditions where a UV filter is really handy for protection. I just got back from shooting at the sea where there was a constant wind blowing both sea spray and fine sand. I had a UV filter on at all times. In fact I had two UV filters so I could switch out dirty UV's with a clean one without having to stop and clean them. Shooting in the desert, I always have a filter on as the fine blowing sand will create havoc with you glass. Shooting rodeos up close results in dirt and rocks being sprayed at you as the animals run past you. UV always on my glass in these times. Shooting paintball games results is paint covering everything, including the UV filter infront of my glass.

Now if you only shoot in nice conditions, then yeh don't use a UV...but there are many situations where the lens hood alone just does not cut the cake.

My favorite here - UV filters. Pops up every other day.

They are useless loss of quality on digital cameras.
Use protective clear filter if you need to protect front element.
Hood is no protection from heavy rain and dust cloud.

Hogloff wrote in post #14658061
I'd say there are plenty conditions where a UV filter is really handy for protection. I just got back from shooting at the sea where there was a constant wind blowing both sea spray and fine sand. I had a UV filter on at all times. In fact I had two UV filters so I could switch out dirty UV's with a clean one without having to stop and clean them. Shooting in the desert, I always have a filter on as the fine blowing sand will create havoc with you glass. Shooting rodeos up close results in dirt and rocks being sprayed at you as the animals run past you. UV always on my glass in these times. Shooting paintball games results is paint covering everything, including the UV filter infront of my glass.

Now if you only shoot in nice conditions, then yeh don't use a UV...but there are many situations where the lens hood alone just does not cut the cake.

You don't need a UV in all of those situations. I saw a post on here quite recently, where a paintball had shattered a filter and that had scratched the element, paint would have cleaned off. Granted, you can't quickly clean it and switching filters is quicker when you are in a hurry, so yes, they can be useful if you don't mind risking the front element getting damaged.

Dirt and rocks being sprayed? Yeah, I shoot cars racing on loose surfaces and get sprayed with dirt and rocks, never had any damage yet. I've had lots of stones hit the front element, they just bounce off and leave a little dust behind which I clean off when I get a quiet moment, only takes a minute. I have seen guys around me using filters have the filters smashed, but I never asked them if the glass damaged the lens. Front elements are thick glass and very tough and filters, well, aren't. They frequently break with impacts that the lens will shrug off. If a big stone comes in fast enough to damage the lens in any way, then the thin filter isn't even going to slow it down significantly, you just end up with the stone plus a load of sharp glass shards hitting your lens.

I live right by the sea, the beach is a few minutes walk from my house. I shoot there quite often, I also go out on the sea in boats. Yeah, the lens gets a little spray and sand on it, but again, nothing that actually damages it. Of course sand at high speed, and in large quantities, can be bad for the glass but in those conditions you are unlikely to be able to see much, let alone get pictures.

I agree that if you want to do quick swaps, rather than spend a minute or two carefully cleaning the lens, then filters are useful. I don't know the wind speeds you get in the desert, but we get some pretty strong winds coming in from the sea and we have very fine sand in the sand dunes. I do aim not to point the lens straight into the wind any more than necessary, but the lenses are fine so far.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using filters if it makes you feel better, or if you need to do be able to switch them out if something really mucky hits, such as paint or mud. I am not saying that they don't have a use for some people or that there aren't a few situations where they can protect the lens (fast moving sand in large quantities being one of them). But, I just cannot justify the cost of several top quality filters a year, to maybe protect a front element that will cost about the same as just two filters. My gear gets treated like the tools it is, it gets bashed about and banged about, my older gear has the dents to show for it (two lenses have flat sides on one edge of the filter thread where they took a hard hit).

I certainly don't shoot just in "nice" conditions. If a lens should get broken then I will get it fixed, if it is in a situation where a filter might have saved it, I don't care. I would probably have had one damaged by a shattered filter by now anyway, and besides, the money I have saved by not buying filters will pay for several front elements (or has actually paid for a couple of nice new lenses).

For what you use the filters for, swapping out rather than cleaning they are useful, and yes in high wind and sand they may even protect the element. I am not telling anyone not to use them, if you feel they are of benefit then use them. If I get a dirty front element while shooting (yes, it happens, mud and stuff getting thrown up) I switch to the spare camera hanging by my side, and keep on shooting with that until I get a few moments to clean up the other lens.

The OP asked for people's views, I gave mine.

protection filters... never

hoods... always

I use a filter for effect only....Hood all the time...

Even if you decide to use filters please DONT use one on a 100-400L ...

sandpiper wrote in post #14658220
The OP asked for people's views, I gave mine.

Ummm, so did I. I am happy the rocks that hit your glass did no damage and only left a dust mark. You know what, I've never had to use my seat belt yet...I guess I should just not buckle up, right?

I agree that using one at the beach against sea spray is a good idea.

I use UV filter when there is a reason to do - not for everyday use.

Recommended read:
Filter on 100-400
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1199661

kf095 wrote in post #14658146
My favorite here - UV filters. Pops up every other day.

They are useless loss of quality on digital cameras.
Use protective clear filter if you need to protect front element.
Hood is no protection from heavy rain and dust cloud.

Er, and exactly what is the advantage of a clear filter over a UV filter? They aren't any cheaper, they don't cause less degradation of image quality, they don't produce less sharp shrapnel when they shatter, they are exactly the same as a UV filter - useless.

Hogloff wrote in post #14658348
You know what, I've never had to use my seat belt yet...I guess I should just not buckle up, right?

That's a rubbish analogy - seat belts are proven to reduce death and serious injury in sudden impacts. Can you point me to a robust statistical study that proves the efficacy of filters as protection? Serious question. I dumped my UVs more than two years ago, but am open to persuasion if you can demonstrably show otherwise.

xhack wrote in post #14661422
That's a rubbish analogy - seat belts are proven to reduce death and serious injury in sudden impacts. Can you point me to a robust statistical study that proves the efficacy of filters as protection? Serious question. I dumped my UVs more than two years ago, but am open to persuasion if you can demonstrably show otherwise.

Fine blowing sand at beach or desert is enough proof for me. Takes one missed grain on the glass and when you go to
clean with your lens cloth, there is nothing sharper to create those fine scratches on your glass.

Like I said, if you don't shoot in conditions that warrant a protective filter, then using one is a waste of time. However I pointed out senarios that are real where a protective filter will reduce your chance of damaging your front element. And no, the lens hood will not help much in these conditions.

I was focussing on impact protection, where I do doubt their usefulness. Otherwise, we're singing from the same hymn sheet - I still use filters in sea spray, dust and other hostile environments.