"L" Glass and Filters Questions.

As some of you may know from my intro, I was not well informed in my initial purchasing plan for my Canon comeback! To say the least!

I am now wondering about the Canon "L" series lenses and which filters will be the best on them.

I like to keep a filter on my lens to protect it. Is this still common practice, or is this "old school?" Geez, I really hated to ask, but what the hay!

If it is common practice still, and I put a filter on my "L" lens, which brand or type will not diminish the sharpness that I'm paying dearly for?

This has been on my mind the last few days, and I welcome your thoughts!

Thanks!

I don't use them, but if I did I'd be using the B+W or Hoya multi-coated UV filters.

It seems like the L lenses are the most important lenses to make sure have UV/clear filters on them, because those are the most expensive ones. Going with a standard Kenko or Hoya clear or UV filter ought to be fine -- I have UV/HAZE filters on all my lenses, but clear filters are also a good idea. The sharpness of your lens is not going to be compromised, but you have to make sure to keep the UV filter clean (as you would with the front element of your lens).

So Jay, Is this because of using a digital camera, or do you have some other reason for this choice?

Thanks!

I'm using UV on my L and D lens, even on my 28-135.

I've stuck to Hoya for the UV, preferably slim to avoid vignetting when I use the CP or other filters as well.

This has worked for me so far, and I'm more concerned with damaging the front glass then compensating for the UV filter. I've shot some seashore sunsets and waves where I've had to duck quickly.

Glad to see you back after your intro post.

I have UV filters on all of my lens bar 1 and that is the 50 1.8. Just the idea that it keeps the front glass safe from damage seems to be a good idea.

I have found that some people say yes, and some people say no when it comes to this topic. I am in the favor of yes, and also a lens hood. for the same reason. potects the lens.

No, just a personal choice. This tends to be a controversial subject, but I just haven't determined it necessary to add what I consider to be extraneous elements/reflective surfaces to my lenses. I use hoods for lens protection and I've never had a problem. I have and occasionally use UV filters in harsh (blowing sand, salt water) conditions.

I am beginning to doubt cricket. Are you for real?

Please Please pardon me if you are, but a lot of things are fishy about your setup and "knowledge"


I could see someone posing as an attractive female who is like a man shopping at a lingere store. Oh that would be cruel!!!

Ok, I had a salesman trying to sell me "Crystal Optics" filters because they are special for digital, and coated on both sides (when I asked him coated with what, he didn't have an answer. Gotta mess with them a little!).

I haven't used that brand, and I do own some Hoya, so maybe that's the best?

Thanks!

If you choose to use a filter for protection (which I was NOT doing on Christmas day when my sister's dog decided to lick the end of my lens), it is a good idea to use a multi-coated filter such as the B&W or Hoya HMC as suggested by HJMinard. This provides an additional guard against ghosting.

The sensor and its anti-aliasing/microlens cover have a tendency to reflect a small amount of light back towards the lens (well, film does this too, but to a much smaller extent). Normally, lens coatings and shape allow this light to pass back out of the lens or be absorbed by the flocking material without a problem. But, a non-coated filter can act something like a mirror - that is, if the light source is very strong, the faint image reflected off the sensor is again reflected back off the clear glass surface of the filter only to form a ghost on the original image.

IIRC, non-coated glass reflects about 5% of the light back towards its source as a mirror would.

Some people prefer to use the lens hood only for protection. I generally do this myself, saving filters for times when I wish to use a polarizer or a neutral density filter. I have, however, learned that filters are a good idea when curious dogs are about.

I believe that I have one of those Crystal Optics filters - the one I have has a silver ring (instead of black) and has no coating. I won't use it except as protection for shipping a lens. The silver ring is bound to reflect light to places on the image where it is least wanted.

I don't understand what you are asking me.

I am for real as far as I'm concerned.

I just want to learn more about digital. I know that some of my questions may make me sound less knowledgeable than some of you, but I am so much more confident with film cameras. I'm willing to risk sounding dim to gain the knowledge.

Personally, I uses quality filters on my lenses, as well as lens hoods. I've had a couple of lens front elements saved by filters, but ultimately, the lens hoods provide more protection. Using filters as protective devices is a matter of personal taste. Some people just can't stand to put another air/glass layer on their L lenses, and some, like me, think any image degradation, except in the most adverse conditions, is imperceptible. And, you can always remove the filter if you need to do so.

Not questioning your lack of knowledge it is just odd that someone would go out and spend close to 10 grand and not know what an L lens was.

Im sorry if i offended you It just all seems a little odd

Good grief
Hasn't this been hashed out extensively in that other ... historic ... thread?