Filters:Clear protector or UV?

Assuming the best glass, tripod and digital sensor etc.:

Filters:Clear protector or UV?
- what are the arguments for one over the other?

Clear
or
UV
???


Please feel free to engage in as much geeky technospeak as you can muster
(PLEASE no arguments about whether a filter should be used at all!)

They are mainly to protect the front lens elements from damage. UV filtering was a concern for film cameras, DSLR's have a UV screen over the sensor.

The best filters are multicoated. I use B + W clear filters on my 16-35 and 24-105 for protection from sand, rough bumping in crowds, etc. www.2filter.com has exellent prices and the people there are very knowledgeable.

Some don't worry about lens damage. It doesn't happen in a perfect world. These threads invariably split 50-50 for users and non-users. Case in point.

Post this on the lens section and let the banter begin! Blah, blah blah from every "expert". I mean everyone will chime in on "protective" filters... Try it. Or search it maybe...?

Multi-coated is the key. I also use the B+W MRC F-Pro UV Haze filters.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter much tbh. If you want to protect your lens, just get something with good quality, UV or protector. Many say UV is totally unnecessary now, but I don't know if they do the job better or worse than the sensor filter. Different cameras filter differently I would guess. Anyway, I've used UV (multicoated) for more than a decade and it's always worked fine for me.

The value of the information imparted would be so much greater if posters could actually check out the links I supplied and also pay attention to this little bit in red

(PLEASE no arguments about whether a filter should be used at all!)

Personally, I get B+W UV(0) MRCs across the board. The cost has never been an issue - they run about the same anywhere I shop, and in your links the UV is less expensive. I prefer to have the same type of filter in front of all my lenses to minimize as many variables as possible. As to whether you need UV with digital or whether clear is sufficient, maybe you don't in normal conditions, but has anyone done tests at altitude, where the UV component of light is stronger?

Jon wrote in post #10878809
Personally, I get B+W UV(0) MRCs across the board. The cost has never been an issue - they run about the same anywhere I shop, and in your links the UV is less expensive. I prefer to have the same type of filter in front of all my lenses to minimize as many variables as possible. As to whether you need UV with digital or whether clear is sufficient, maybe you don't in normal conditions, but has anyone done tests at altitude, where the UV component of light is stronger?

the comments previously about there being an UV filter in front of the sensor interest me, and hint that clear might be adequate.???

BUT: I shoot mostly not at high altitudes, but at the coast, where there is a lot of UV, but short of buying both and doing tests I'm no nearer weighing one more than the other at the mo, as I have no way of knowing whether the UV filter in front of the sensor is enough or whether one over the lens would be a further improvement

I Simonius wrote in post #10878932
BUT: I shoot mostly not at high altitudes, but at the coast, where there is a lot of UV

There is no more UV at the coast than there is inland. Indeed, it's fairly likely that there is less, because UV is absorbed by the atmosphere and so is stronger at higher altitudes. And the land does tend to be higher than the sea.

The glass in your lenses will absorb anything lower than around 280nm. This site (a translation from the original Polish) explains that and also links to tests done on various UV filters with a spectrophotometer. They also show the results of their contrast and flare tests - anybody thinking of buying Tiffen really should look at the results first. Hoya come out shining, B&W not so good.

OH OK - I thought there was lots at the coast - I am probably confusing it with all the reflected light - great link! - thanks

Interesting to see which has best transmission of VISIBLE light though .....

I Simonius wrote in post #10878932
the comments previously about there being an UV filter in front of the sensor interest me, and hint that clear might be adequate.???

BUT: I shoot mostly not at high altitudes, but at the coast, where there is a lot of UV, but short of buying both and doing tests I'm no nearer weighing one more than the other at the mo, as I have no way of knowing whether the UV filter in front of the sensor is enough or whether one over the lens would be a further improvement

Not really...a majority of the UV is filtered out by the atmosphere. About the only time that you'd need a UV protector is at altitudes above 10,000 feet. For that reason (and the fact that you don't shoot at altitude), if you just have to have lens protection then go with a good quality clear protector (or whichever is less expensive, clear or UV).

ben_r_ wrote in post #10875041
Multi-coated is the key. I also use the B+W MRC F-Pro UV Haze filters.

I use B+W MRC F-Pro UV too

Look at it this way - if there's no cost advantage to buying clear protective filters over UVs (which, in my experience as well as in the case OP was looking at there isn't), and if UVs can help if you find yourself with a film camera (it could happen), and if UVs may help at altitudes (shooting out an airplane window is well above 10K ft., for instance), then why not get the UV? If the UV doesn't filter anything the in-camera filter also does, it won't have any different effect than a clear one, and if you find yourself in the "special cases", it'll help the situation by attenuating the UV.

I like UV myself. Get good ones if you get them at all. Hoya Pro 1D and HD have been my choice and I have been very pleased. Good prices on the website 2filter. Much cheaper than B&H. Got some polarizers there as well. Nice folks. In New Hampshire if I recall.

Jon wrote in post #10887086
Look at it this way - if there's no cost advantage to buying clear protective filters over UVs V.

good poiint!

I should have mentioned that I already have Hoya Pro filters on my lenses but they are darned difficult to clean, especially out in the field. They OFTEN get sea spray on and all that seesm to happen is that it smears round and round - I have one B+W filter which cleans MUCH easier so I thought of swapping brands