another poll

[back alley]

how many keep a uv or skylight filter on their lenses?

i have always kept one or the other on all my lenses for 'protection' and have not noticed any decrease in lens performance.
however, i am considering dropping this practise.

again, just curious...

joe

 

[Rich Silfver]

Always.

If I don't have one on the camera I'm about to take out I swap one onto it. I'd say I wear a UV/Skylight 100% of the time.

Brand wise I prefer B+W as I like the Schott glass in them.
Even though they are somewhat pricey a) they wont 'degrade' your image quality and b) they're still gonna be cheaper than most of the cameras I put them on - should I happen to scratch the lens.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

All my camera lenses are "protected" by a UV or any kind of glass. My SLR lenses have CPLs, and my rangefinders show UVs. Decided to do it ever since one day when I went for a walk near the Michigan lake, the wind was blowing sand at a very scary speed and with a formidable intensity.

So, no naked lenses this side of paradise! 😛

 

[ZeissFan]

I had been using them, but lately I haven't. Although some still have the UV filters, and some don't. Any most of my Nikkors have the Skylight 1A (popular during the 1970s).

 

[Doug]

Most of my lenses have a UV filter, though less likely for those with rigid hoods. I'll move filters around to active gear. Also, I've been replacing some old filters with new multicoated ones.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

I keep UV filters on RF's, Polarizers on SLR's. Gotta protect the glass

 

[taffer]

Except with FSU lenses (I think Rover placed a link here for some 40.5mm stuff on eBay which I must check someday) all my other fixed lens RFs and SLRs go out with the UV/pol. filter on them.

I was lucky enough to receive both canonets with the appropiate UV filter, the olympus takes my 55mm UV via 49/55 adapter (or is it 52/55?) and the Himatic has already a 55mm thread.

I like a lot shooting under the rain, so I feel really better with that filters on place. It's not for the rain drops, but for the possible damage when trying to clean them !

 

[Kris]

My SLR lenses have Sky 1B for protection. My RF lenses don't. I cannot find 43mm HMC 1B or UV for my Color-Heliar, 52mm HMC for Nokton is abundant but this lens is huge and I really hate adding something that would block the viewfinder even more. I don't even use the dedicated lens hood. Instead, I put screw in an empty filter ring. No non-HMC filter in my dictionary. I had experienced bad ghosting with non-HMC but never have any problem with HMC filters.

 

[wierdcollector]

I use skylight filters on all my SLR lenses, but very few of my RF equipment came with filters or hoods/shades so I pretty much use those with no protection. I have polarizers for all my SLR equipment, but similar to hoods/shades and cases, I store them all in various drawers and usually can't take the time to dig them out when I need them. Photography for me, at least lately, has been a grab 'n go kind of thing where if I get a window of opportunity, I find I rush out the door and usually leave at least one thing at home. Usually my common sense, LOL.

 

[oftheherd]

I don't have a UV lens on every lens, but try to. I think it is better to keep the lens clean rather than to keep cleaning the lens (learned from Ed Romney's book).

 

[DickS]

Keep a filter on your lens if it accomplishes what you want to accomplish. A UV filter doesn't accomplish much and to answer your question, no, I don't keep a filter on my lens at all times. Generally I have no filter on when shooting color film With black and white I use a filter more frequently.

Since I don't have a habit of dropping my camera or lens I don't use a filter for protection although when I am not shooting I keep the lens cap on.

Dick

 

[Scarpia]

To Kris
Many digicams use 43mm filters. I bought a little kit from Circuit City about a year ago with one UV and one polarizer along with 2 lenshade adapters for different digicams not using 43mm filters.
It is made by Tiffen and the whole thing cost $9.95 which I still can't believe. Check the mass marketers and best of luck.
Kurt M.

 

[Taipei-metro]

No filters.
Filters altered the original lens design; One more element added by you!

 

[Kris]

Scarpia, I live Down Under and the only multicoated 43mm filter I can get here is B+W ones. The price is just something I'm not willing to pay. I don't know which one is worse: cough up big bucks for KR 1.5 B+W MRC or always worrying of sand particles scratching my front elements. Here Down Under, we have desert all around us so there are lots of dust flying around especially in windy summer days. So far the lens hoods do a good job.

 

[Rich Silfver]

@Taipei-metro - I don't think that a piece of clear, good quality, flat glass infront of your lens 'alters the lens design' in any way.
I could bet you that if I took two photos one with a clear MC B+W filter on - and one without you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

The difference to me is that I just protected the lens from any accidental scratch that could occur.

 

[pvdhaar]

I don't use filters unless called for by the situation. Modern lenses and lens coatings go a long way in subdueing UV in ordinary circumstances. On top of that, in my experienve, filters are a magnet for dirt, dust and fingerprints.