Which UV filters for those lenses ?

Hi all,

If everything goes well I'll be the proud owner of those lenses in few weeks :

• 24-70;
  
• 70-200 f2.8 IS USM;
  
• 100-400 IS USM.

What sort of conditions do you shoot in, Laurent? If you're shooting outdoors in blowing sand or rain or expect to shoot so close to animals that they lick your lens, a "protection" filter might be advisable.

I have never used a filter for "protection" but always use a rigid hood (each designed for the individual lens) and have never had any damage to any of my lenses - even the ones that I bought in the mid 1960's - except for wear to the external finish due to use.

If you really feel that you need a "protection" filter, make sure it's the highest quality multicoated filter you can buy. They are not inexpensive, so maybe you could have one on hand and choose when to put it on any one of your lenses.

I have all those lenses except for the 100-400, I use B+W 010 MRC UV filters, yes they're expensive, but so are the lenses you're buying. I do use my UV filters for protection when I don't want to use the lens hoods, or don't have room for them (sorry Jon, it's tight in my Domke F-2)

Also you might consider taking an insurance policy on your gear for added piece of mind.

SkipD wrote in post #4224280
What sort of conditions do you shoot in, Laurent?

I'm not shooting in bad conditions, my body isn't weather sealed.... So I avoid that as much as possible.
And I'm not too close from animals to scratch my lens.

SkipD wrote in post #4224280
If you really feel that you need a "protection" filter, make sure it's the highest quality multicoated filter you can buy. They are not inexpensive, so maybe you could have one on hand and choose when to put it on any one of your lenses.

That sounds good to me.

scot079 wrote in post #4224292
I have all those lenses except for the 100-400, I use B+W 010 MRC UV filters, yes they're expensive, but so are the lenses you're buying. I do use my UV filters for protection when I don't want to use the lens hoods, or don't have room for them (sorry Jon, it's tight in my Domke F-2)

Also you might consider taking an insurance policy on your gear for added piece of mind.

You're right, thats the B+W filter I heard about, great one, expensive yes, but as you said, with those (expensive) lenses, I need something great too.

For insurance I need to check if there is such things for lenses in Belgium...
But anyway thanks for the idea.

Anyway thank you all for your input

Laurent.

Skip's advice is on the money. For those times I use a filter I only use either B+W or Heliopan.

If you're currently using the Hoya Pro-1 S-HMC filters, they're roughly on a par with the B+W MRCs or the Heliopans. I use the B+W MRCs, but I don't think you need to change brands if you're satisfied with your current ones. And I have filters on all my lenses since I never know what's going to come up.

This is what Skip was referring to - an actual, unstaged shoot of mine:

Jon wrote in post #4225554
If you're currently using the Hoya Pro-1 S-HMC filters, they're roughly on a par with the B+W MRCs or the Heliopans. I use the B+W MRCs, but I don't think you need to change brands if you're satisfied with your current ones. And I have filters on all my lenses since I never know what's going to come up.

This is what Skip was referring to - an actual, unstaged shoot of mine:

I agree, also I dont see how anyone can know what conditions they will be shooting in, one minute I might be inland shooting architectural stuff where there would be minimal risk, the next I might find myself on the coast with winds picking up & sand & sea spray starting to blow around.

I use Hoya Pro-1 filters on all my lenses & out of thousands of images I have never had any ruined due to the filter, I always do a series of tests when I first buy a filter to determine if there is any degradation, I test them in more extreme conditions than what I would normally find when im out shooting for real, even under really bad conditions I have not seen any increase in flare or loss of sharpness when viewing my images at 100%, so in this case it makes no sense to not use one.

Always buy the best though, dont waste money with cheap filters, its because of those cheapy ones why using filters now has a stigma attached, with many assuming they will have an adverse effect on IQ, there has been some lens/filter combinations that have thrown up such effects but its not the norm.

Thank you all for your great answers

Have a nice day.

Laurent.

Whether you're using a filter or not, you should be using the hoods at all times anyway, unless they hinder the shot.

That's what I'm currently doing with my other lenses, but I think I'll be more ancious with those new ones.

Thanks

I agree with leaving the hood on all the time, although they dont do anything for guarding against seaspray etc.. but good for shading the lens the use they are intended for.

Thanks Nick.

Is one of you able to let me know if this is the famous B+W 010 MRC UV filters we often talk about ?
B&H B+W 77mm UV Haze 010 (MRC)

Thanks in advance.
Laurent.

that's one of them, yes

22

devil350 wrote in post #4237666
Thanks Nick.

Is one of you able to let me know if this is the famous B+W 010 MRC UV filters we often talk about ?
B&H B+W 77mm UV Haze 010 (MRC)

Thanks in advance.
Laurent.

Ok thanks I'll try to compare it to the Pro 1 S-HMC of Hoya and make a decision.
Not easy, but I heard that the B+W have less or no static issues, my Pro 1 S-HMC often attract dust...
And I often have dust between the filter and the lens, or the filter is correctly screwed.

Hoya uses an aluminum ring where as B+W and Heliopan's rings are made of brass. Brass is not only stronger but doesn't tend to seize (the threadds) when mounting and unmounting as aluminum does. I also prefer the way B+W and Heliopan make their glass over Hoya, but many feel this is a non-issue.