To filter or not filter?

[kknox]

I have been shooting film and digital for many years, always use filters on my Leitz glass. I just purchased some Fuji X lens. I have UV filters on most just for protection, would you shoot always with a filter on, or off? The lens coatings are so advanced now, just wonder if I would to get cleaner images with out a filter.

 

[YYV_146]

I did a series of tests related to the uv filter issue. Could not notice any visual degradation, other than increased flaring with point light sources.

I don't use uv's at night or with studio lighting. Otherwise I always have one on my lens.

 

[MrFujicaman]

Filters are cheap...repairs to a Leica lens never are.

 

[Sid836]

Cheap filters always deliver poor results. Either put an expensive filter on your expensive equipment, or nothing on your not so expensive ones.

 

[sevo]

Cheap filters always deliver poor results.

Or so the expensive filter makers say. Out in the wild I've seen very few (undamaged) black and white filters capable of visibly degrading a normal or wide angle lens - half a century old uncoated filters obviously have a glare problem, but in general, the errors introduced by the average "plain single coated" filter are well below the average focus error and camera shake in usual conditions. Just stay clear of imitations and the cheap ebay filter kits mailed straight from Hong Kong...

 

[kknox]

I have only used B&W & Leica filters on my lens. I did pick up a 72mm B&W for my 10-24 fujiX lens.

 

[Vics]

I only use filters as light modifiers.

 

[nongfuspring]

I don't see any noticeable difference in image degradation, the only issue for me is distracting reflection of light point sources which is why I generally take the filter off in low light.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Or so the expensive filter makers say. Out in the wild I've seen very few (undamaged) black and white filters capable of visibly degrading a normal or wide angle lens - half a century old uncoated filters obviously have a glare problem, but in general, the errors introduced by the average "plain single coated" filter are well below the average focus error and camera shake in usual conditions. Just stay clear of imitations and the cheap ebay filter kits mailed straight from Hong Kong...

Same here. And same for everyone I know who has actually tested it.

Cheers,

R.

 

[nobbylon]

I always have B&w or Leica filters on all my expensive lenses. Drop a lens with a filter on and hit the front and the filter will take the hit. Resale of any lens without cleaning marks and/or scratches is always higher. The B&W I use on my NIkons are fantastic for shedding water. I had a hose pipe pointed at my 24-70 full on whilst shooting Holi in India. The paint and water washed straight off with a good blow and I didn't even have to wipe the lens. I'd rather that happened to a filter than the front element.

 

[Addy101]

I usuaelly don't use filters. But it is a heated debate as people tend to use one-liners like the ones already used in this thread.

My position? Do whatever makes you feel best. The protection of filters is dubious, but if it makes you feel ever so much more secure, use a filter. Image degradation with a good filter is minimal, almost non-existent, but if you worry about it, don't use filters. Whatever you do, always use a hood!

 

[Monochrom]

Some time ago i was about to leave my uv filters at home...

... but then two things happened, i dropped my m9 with a 35mm cron v4 and it landed on the m39 filter ring...then another time i was packing my biogon 28mm zm lens in a bag and when unpacked it there was a clear scratch of 10mm long in the glass of the filter...

...as you may understand i never take filters off my lenses.

 

[Addy101]

Yeah, if you're not careful, you need a filter....

 

[daveleo]

I often use a soft f/x filter for.... the effect !
If I am in a windy place where dirt or pollen or spray might impact the lens, I will use a "skylight" or "UV/protector" filter, but some experience with flare and ghosting makes me avoid filters when I can (which is most of the time).

I always use a lens hood (smallest one I can get away with).

 

[Roger Hicks]

I usuaelly don't use filters. But it is a heated debate as people tend to use one-liners like the ones already used in this thread.

My position? Do whatever makes you feel best. The protection of filters is dubious, but if it makes you feel ever so much more secure, use a filter. Image degradation with a good filter is minimal, almost non-existent, but if you worry about it, don't use filters. Whatever you do, always use a hood!

No it isn't. Frances tripped once on steep steps in the Himalayas. Her 35/2.8 PC Nikkor smashed into a pebble in gravel. The L39 filter was shattered. The front glass was (and still is) fine.

A good hood will often offer even more protection. But not always.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Yeah, if you're not careful, you need a filter....

You might as well say, "If you never go anywhere or do anything, but just fondle your lenses at home, you don't need filters." Both statements are equally patronizing and pointless.

Cheers,

R.

 

[nongfuspring]

I usuaelly don't use filters. But it is a heated debate as people tend to use one-liners like the ones already used in this thread.

Indeed. There's a particularly long and tedious thread on this already on the forum which I think stresses any possible viewpoint on the topic ad nauseum. Perhaps OP might like to take a look, read until s/he gets bored, and make up his/her own mind.

Probably the best advice is to ignore everyone and do your own tests to decide. You're talking about a digital camera after all so it's not like it'll cost you anything.

 

[btgc]

I like unfiltered home brewed draft.

As for lenses, I put clear or warming filters when on beach or other gritty environments. Or colored filter for B&W when I feel I need 'em. But not "just in case for every lens".

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Where are filters to modify light, UV is included. And where are protective filters.
Do yourself a favor, walk into good camera store and ask to show you the deifference between UV and protective camera.
It is fine to use UV filter as protective filter on film camera, but on digital it is useless in terms of UV.
Yes, I use UV and protective filters. I take pictures not in the studio.
I don"t like to have front element to be scratched accidentaly, nor I like to have all kind of crap on it to clean regularly.

 

[oftheherd]

Shouldn't this be in the religion sub-forum? 😛 😀

Personally I put UV filters on most of my lenses. Just me, nobody else has to believe that way.