Anyone here do not use a protective filter on their zeiss lens?

P

pajamas

Member
Local time
10:10 AM
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
29
Just wondering how many here do not put on a UV filter as a protective lens cover by choice?

Please elaborate your decision as to why. Thanks
 
Yes and no. If I am using my lenses somewhere a bit hostile to them like by the sea on a windy day with salt water spray in the air then yes I do. Otherwise no I don't as there is no need. As for protecting the front element of my lenses from accidental knocks, that is what lens hoods are for.;)
 
I do not have any filter in front of my 50mm Planar, nor any of my other lenses. I like to have my lenses be as unadulterated as possible, and never saw a real need for a UV filter. As full lumen said, the hood does a fine job of protecting it from accidental bumps, and the front element on the lens is like new.
 
Always use filters, on my distagon and other lenses. It's partly habit (been doing it for over forty years), partly so that I can clean them relatively crudely with the none-too-clean glass fibre cloth I always carry in my pocket. And I replace filters when they become noticeably scratched. Nettar
 
18/4, 50/1.5 for Leica and 38/4.5 for Alpa: no. Never got round to it. In fact, the only lenses that always have filters on them are the 35/1.4 and the 90/2. But they ALL have lens shades and most are normally protected by OpTech 'hood hats' when not in use (andd a plain lens cap on the Biogon). Hood Hats are amazing: see
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/review optech shower cap.html

Cheers,

Rr.
 
I do not use any filters at all on any of my RF lenses. I use a lens hood, though. All the time. Why degrade a quality optic with any glass at all.
 
I only use a filter on my Canon 50/1.4. Most importantly because it's the only lens I have a filter for that isn't orange. And it may be a bit easier to scratch than newer lenses, so I figured it made sense. Other than that, hoods on everything for protection.
 
raid said:
I do not use any filters at all on any of my RF lenses. I use a lens hood, though. All the time. Why degrade a quality optic with any glass at all.
Click to expand...

Dear Raid,

Have you ever actually seen any image degradation from filters? Flare may be a possibility if you don't use lens hoods or shoot into the sun, but neither I, nor anyone else whose reports I have ever read, has ever actually seen any degradation of resolution or contrast in reasonably formal testing. This includes Ctein, a far better experimentalist than I.

Cheers,

R.
 
I'll go with Roger on this. In 40+ years I've ALWAYS placed a protective filter on ALL my lenses. Never seen any degradation despite extensive testing.
Surely a filter is cheaper to replace than a lens.
 
I'm with Roger here -- I have never noticed any degradation from using filters. However, I'd go a bit further -- I can't honestly say that I've ever noticed degradation from a (moderately) scratched filter, either! Indeed, unless you are using very short focal lengths and a small sensor camera, or shooting into the light, it always surprises me how much gunk I can have on a filter without having problems. The same is probably true for a lens, too. So, why do I bother even with filters?! Well, I just don't like to scratch lenses, I guess. Maybe I'm just superstitious... Nettar
 
I use UV filters to protect the lenses (35/2,8 and 85/2). Caps + hoods as well if I can. Especially in polluted city or by the windy seaside. Week or 2 ago I spent lot of time cleaning the filters after seaside trip. However if I would know that I'm going to shoot in low light, at same clean place where I can be careful, I would probably take them off. I guess they might add some flare.
 
Double Negative said:
If you DO decide to use them, get the best. B+W, Heliopan or higher-end Hoyas. Cheap filters are no bargain!
Click to expand...

Heliopan are a relatively poor value [link].

I do keep a Hoya or B+W on most of my lenses, most of the time. I'd be pretty unhappy if a piece of grit got on the microfiber cloth or the lenspen and trashed the front element on a nice lens. And it rains a lot here so I wipe the front elements a lot. If you're using good UV filters they'll almost never have any detectable effect on what the film or sensor see, anyway — as Ctein's tests and the tests run by Lenstip (linked above) show.
 
Last edited:
[/QUOTE18/4, 50/1.5 for Leica and 38/4.5 for Alpa: no. Never got round to it. In fact, the only lenses that always have filters on them are the 35/1.4 and the 90/2. But they ALL have lens shades and most are normally protected by OpTech 'hood hats' when not in use (andd a plain lens cap on the Biogon). Hood Hats are amazing: see
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subsc...wer cap.html

Cheers,

Rr.

Love the "Hood Hats". Thanks Roger
Click to expand...
 
Can't help you. Mine is a 1943 Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5 LTM and coating is very soft. All my other lenses are filterless but the wartime Zeiss Sonnars are all filtered.
 
I never use protective filters.

I don't do anything unless there is some compelling reason to do so. I have not found that compelling reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom