Leica lenses: UV filter or not?

[Gilo25]

Apologies if this has been debated already, but unfortunately I couldn't find the relevant thread(s). Do you think it is worth having a UV filter permanently screwed on a fine Leica lens to avoid damaging it, or is it like going around with a Ferrari and put a power limiter to avoid consuming too much petrol?

 

[uhoh7]

I sometimes use filters as caps but always take them off to shoot on the M9. I do have hoods for everything and that helps protect them.

I have yet to damage an M lens. Knock on wood.

There are long arguments about if it matters for IQ.

 

[richard_l]

I don't use UV filters for front element protection, but I do like lens hoods, which serve a dual purpose: reducing flare and protecting the lens. However, I don't think that good UV filters do any harm to image quality unless they contribute to flare.

With B&W film photography, I do use contrast filters, but not for lens protection.

With compact digital Leicas having telescoping fixed lenses, I enclose the lens with a lens tube and UV filter to help prevent dust particles from being sucked into the camera when the lens extends.

 

[Timmyjoe]

I had a photography teacher tell me to remove the filters from my Leica lenses many years ago and it kind of stuck with me. His argument was the same as your Ferrari argument.

I do have clear/UV filters for all my Leica glass, it's just that I only put them on when I'm going to be shooting in some adverse conditions. Otherwise, the Leica glass goes bare.

 

[Rob-F]

Leica uses a cement between elements they call 'absorban" (their trade name for it) that is supposed to absorb UV light, obviating the need for a UVa filter. However, I use a UVa or skylight filter over all my lenses to keep the clean and cut down on the need for brushing and wiping. A good multicoated filter helps preserve image quality.

 

[FrankS]

I have a couple of vintage leitz lenses with notoriously soft front element glass, that are in pretty good condition. I want to preserve that.

 

[Godfrey]

I haven't used filters for protection for 35-40 years, other than in situations where there is flying dust, water, and grit in the air. I keep a rigid lens hood attached to every lens in use, and use a lens cap when the lens is stored.

I fit filters when I need them to filter light, mostly for B&W film.

G

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Even little dust will bug me on front element. This is why I'm using filter, instead of scratching lens. 😎

 

[maddoc]

The superior quality of a clean out of the box Leica lens without protecting filter will soon be degrading to levels inferior of a clean lens with protecting filter because a filter can be easily cleaned with mild dish washing agent and alcohol to remove all kind of dirt. Additionally, if the filter is broken or scratched it can be easily replaced, a front element is a different thing ...

 

[GaryLH]

+1

I have filters plus lens hoods on all my lenses as well for all those reasons. However, I won't use a cheap filter. I also would agree about using multi coated filters.

No matter how careful u are, accidents will happen.. If a filter gets scratched or some crap gets on them, I am not gonna cry about it...scratch on the front element of the lens, a whole different matter.

Gary

 

[V-12]

or is it like going around with a Ferrari and put a power limiter to avoid consuming too much petrol?

Not using a filter where appropriate is like going around in a Ferrari without a windscreen, you can only go 20mph instead of 150mph. The analogy explained is that if the conditions are such you are likely to get dust or fingerprints or rain on the front element, use a filter. It means you can quickly clean stuff off with the hem of a tee-shirt or any available cloth and get on with photography, not going through a lengthy ritual of using a blower brush then lens cloth on the front element. And it should also be common sense that says if you are in a situation where the possibility of missing a picture could be ruined by having to clean your front element, such as sports, theatre, concerts, social events, etc. then a UV filter should also be used.

So there is no definite 'yes' or 'no' and don't believe there is, but clearly if in doubt use a filter, a good picture gained is better than a good picture lost to cleaning your lens, and a good filter such as a B+W MRC will not affect picture quality at all.

V

 

[bonatto]

'high quality filters have no affect at all on lens resolution'

https://photographylife.com/filters-affect-resolution-lenses

UV filter on means you never really need a lens cap, and if you need to wipe it down with a breath of fog and your shirt it won't be the end of the world. I rather clean the daily crud off a filter than the front element of a lens.

 

[Fraser]

'high quality filters have no affect at all on lens resolution'

https://photographylife.com/filters-affect-resolution-lenses

UV filter on means you never really need a lens cap, and if you need to wipe it down with a breath of fog and your shirt it won't be the end of the world. I rather clean the daily crud off a filter than the front element of a lens.

+1
First thing I do when I get a new lens it put a filter on it then I can forget about lens caps. All my Leica lenses have either Leica filters or my favourite Heliopan. Maybe filters do degrade the image quality a bit but there is an awful lot of other factors that will have more effect.

 

[Range-rover]

All my lenses have filters I use B&W multicoated ones, when I was a School
photographer the little fingers always found their way by my lens so filter's
it is.

range

 

[leicapixie]

All my lenses have a filter on, always. Air grease is enough of a reason. My filters are all in a very bad shape after a few years of use, so imagine the front element if it wasn't protected.

No, I won't buy a used lens if it never had a filter on.

Agree +1.
My 50mm Collapsible Summicron is usually scratched from cleaning.
Mine is mint.

 

[presspass]

For nearly 40 years I have been documenting the activities of our local volunteer fire company. I keep filters on all lenses, Leica and otherwise, because I work close and don't want water and debris on the front element. I don't have time at a fire or a rescue call to put filters on lenses before I start working.

 

[Gilo25]

Thanks to all. In summary, it seems that the majority is willing to sacrifice some IQ for peace of mind, a tiny minority goes always without protection while some use filters only when the circumstances may turn out to be 'dangerous'.

 

[hendriphile]

Agree +1.
My 50mm Collapsible Summicron is usually scratched from cleaning.
Mine is mint.

I can't recall the source of this aphorism about using filters, but it goes something like, "Better to keep the lens clean, than to keep cleaning it."

 

[harvester]

it's in the M5 manual. 🙂
not sure re other models.

I can't recall the source of this aphorism about using filters, but it goes something like, "Better to keep the lens clean, than to keep cleaning it."

 

[rscheffler]

A possibly relevant factor is whether you plan to retain the lens indefinitely, or if you tend to buy/sell gear frequently. If the latter, then probably worthwhile using a filter just for the reduced hassle and ease transactions when dealing with typically very picky buyers.

As for micro scratches and the likes degrading image quality. I suppose it may be quantifiable. But whether or not it is remotely noticeable, may be another matter. Lensrentals did a blog post some time ago giving an idea of how badly a front element can be damaged and still produce usable images. Of course you never want it to go to that extreme. 🙂

As for me, I don't use them for protection purposes and prefer rigid hoods for impact protection and to block my fingers. Yes, all of my lenses now have minuscule cleaning marks. My philosophy is similar to how I look forward to the first chip in a new car's finish: I can stop worrying about the possibility and get on with using it.

But I also don't plan to sell these at a premium if/when I do so.