Protective (dust) filter for Canon EF-S 17-55

Have ordered the Canon 17-55, which has reputation for sucking in dust. Since I do a lot of shooting outside, would like to minimize the amount of potential dust getting inside [even though yes, dust evidently does not negatively effect the IQ]. So, any thoughts on the following, so that protect AND no negative to the imaging:
Marumi 77mm 77 Super DHG Filter UV L390 MC - ~$45
Hoya 77mm DMC PRO1 Clear Protector Digital Filter - ~$60
B+W 77mm UVA (Ultra Violet) Haze MRC Filter #010 - ~$85
or

I've had the same lens for a year and a half and just looked it over carefully myself. No internal dust issues at all using a B+W UV/slim pro (with the front threads). Used it a lot for V-ball/Basketball/Perfor​ming arts photos/videos and most recently capturing two Christmas Parades. I did get some dust in the viewfinder of my 3 month old 7D however...

I've had this lens since December 2007 and there is no dust and I use no filter.

Save your money. Or buy this.

B+W 77MM SLIM CLEAR MRC (007M)

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …lear_Multi_Resi​stant.html

Protective Filter FAQ. I suspect that dust in the 17-55 gets in through the barrel (zoom ring, focus ring), not around the front element though. I use B+W MRC UVs against front element abrasion and sticky fingers/noses/tongues.

I have a 70-200 F4, I can see small dust specks. it's internal zoom, so shouldn't be the zooming. I have no filter. so is it possible for dust to get in from front element?

Internal or external zoom or focus makes no difference. The lens tube isn't solid - it's interrupted by the focusing and zoom rings. Unless those are sealed, they're still avenues for dust to enter.

http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/drp

part (or whole?) of the reason why 17-55's getting dust.

Jon wrote in post #11475573
Internal or external zoom or focus makes no difference. The lens tube isn't solid - it's interrupted by the focusing and zoom rings. Unless those are sealed, they're still avenues for dust to enter.

so are you saying that getting a filter won't help? because I'm considering getting filters to prevent dust

It may help by eliminating one way dust can get in, but it's not a cure-all.

I have mine for a year now and I install a Tiffen UV filter from day one. I was just checking today the lens and doesn't have any particle of dust inside.I think it really comes down of how you treat your equipment. Avoid changing lenses in windy condition.

keyframe14 wrote in post #11476131
I have mine for a year now and I install a Tiffen UV filter from day one. I was just checking today the lens and doesn't have any particle of dust inside.I think it really comes down of how you treat your equipment. Avoid changing lenses in windy condition.

Try an experiment. Put the camera on a good solid tripod and aim it at a scene that has some bright highlights in the scene. A night scene is often good for this test. Shoot an image with the filter on and another with the filter off. Chances are you will see an improvement with the filter off. Tiffen filters are rated on the bottom of the barrel for their reflective qualities that degrade images.

I don't understand this whole "DUST" thing. I don't have dust in any of my lens. (at least not that I can see)

People on this forum say that the 17-55 is a dust magnet and they call the 100-400 a dust pump. I have both and have never had problems with dirt/dust in either. I had the 35-350 that I bought in 1995 and used until I bought the 100-400 in 2005. The 35-350 was push/pull as is the 100-400.
Never had a problem with it.

Don't tell me I baby my equipment, I don't. I live in the desert and we have our share of dust.

Maybe I should use a magnifying glass to inspect my lens closer.

Denny G wrote in post #11476496
I don't understand this whole "DUST" thing. I don't have dust in any of my lens. (at least not that I can see)

People on this forum say that the 17-55 is a dust magnet and they call the 100-400 a dust pump. I have both and have never had problems with dirt/dust in either. I had the 35-350 that I bought in 1995 and used until I bought the 100-400 in 2005. The 35-350 was push/pull as is the 100-400.
Never had a problem with it.

Don't tell me I baby my equipment, I don't. I live in the desert and we have our share of dust.

Maybe I should use a magnifying glass to inspect my lens closer.

put it under a lamp light, I see really small specks inside

Jon wrote in post #11475293
Protective Filter FAQ. I suspect that dust in the 17-55 gets in through the barrel (zoom ring, focus ring), not around the front element though. I use B+W MRC UVs against front element abrasion and sticky fingers/noses/tongues.

Well, lol, one item in all this is that putting out "yet another durn near grand for yet another lens" [my lady's words], and reading so many reviews & comments here and there about this lens, want to make sure that any protection possibly needed would be done, while (as said before) not at all degrading the quality of the image. So, yes, honestly thanks - I had read that FAQ, actually a couple times, but my query however here was more in line directly related to this particular lens, its possible special characteristics / needs... if that makes sense; and also to hopefully get more feedback on the Marumi filters, given their less cost, but from some other reviews quite positive feedback. Thanks!

SkipD wrote in post #11476352
Try an experiment. Put the camera on a good solid tripod and aim it at a scene that has some bright highlights in the scene. A night scene is often good for this test. Shoot an image with the filter on and another with the filter off. Chances are you will see an improvement with the filter off. Tiffen filters are rated on the bottom of the barrel for their reflective qualities that degrade images.

I never thought that filter will alter image quality. Never thought will improve my photos either, I just install it to protect my glass. What filter do you recommended Skip?