novum
Well-known
I hate filters and I love hoods.
Oculus Sinister
Member
I use protective filters on all my lenses, I can live with whatever image degradation(if any) it causes, small price to pay for my peace of mind. The only lens I have which doesn't have a filter is my EF Canon 200 1.8L and I don't think they sell prot filters for those, good thing it has a humongous hood 
thinkfloyd
Flippy Nose
I used to use filters, but not anymore. I shot two scenes once, with and without filter, and the degradation was apparent. More importantly, I once tried to "remove" the coating on a old third-party lens for use for UV photography, and I had the toughest time removing the filter that I had to scrape it off using a coin! haha... after that, I believe the coatings of modern lenses are designed to withstand even more damage, so I never bothered using filters again. HOwever, older non-coated lenses are a different matter...
axiom
Non-Registered User
I am running into the same problem.
I BASICALLY don't want to put filters on my lenses, but when I think of the value of 1 of my lenses, I hesitate.
Let me ask this.
If you own a Noctilux, do you put filter on it??
ps.
I not only want to shoot naked, I want to carry my lenses with out front caps too just to minimise the size
I BASICALLY don't want to put filters on my lenses, but when I think of the value of 1 of my lenses, I hesitate.
Let me ask this.
If you own a Noctilux, do you put filter on it??
ps.
I not only want to shoot naked, I want to carry my lenses with out front caps too just to minimise the size
amateriat
We're all light!
axiom: No filters or caps on my lenses, but always a hood, even on my Contax Tvs (and it took a bit of looking to get the proper hood for its lens). Good for a bit of flare resistance, but physical protection is an even bigger deal for me.
- Barrett
- Barrett
tmfabian
I met a man once...
I put nice b+w or heliopan filters on all my glass, why? because i'm too busy photographing to be bothered with worrying about being uber duber careful with the front of my lens....especially when shooting with 2 bodies. It's paid off pretty well, espeically when the front of my 28mm was randomly sprayed with what seemed to be some mix of flamable liquids while photographing a firebreather for an article...whatever he was blowing at the flames took the coating right off the filter....who knows what it would've done to the lens.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
At least those of us earning a living with our cameras get to depreciate the purchase price and write off the cost of repairs when we file our taxes.
http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
ampguy
Veteran
still experimenting
still experimenting
for 28mm and above, and b/w, definitely not.
For 15/4.5 initially looks fine in color and b/w without.
Will test 21 soon.
still experimenting
for 28mm and above, and b/w, definitely not.
For 15/4.5 initially looks fine in color and b/w without.
Will test 21 soon.
Roger Warren
AddlepatedWight
use filters for B&W and UV protection in extreme situations
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
I never use filters for protection.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
I favor Trojans.
amateriat
We're all light!
Yeah, but you know how hard it is to get one of those over a lens? (And no "Magnum" jokes, please...)
- Barrett
chrishayton
Well-known
Never used UV filters on my rangefinder stuff as was never worried about scratching the grass, Till I bought the cv 35mm f1.2. Been using it without but worry got the better of me so ordered a B+W MRC UV filter to ease the feeling of dread everytime I fumble with the cap in the hood.
Also will happily shoot hood-less now when i feel size is an issue as the fronts protected.
Also will happily shoot hood-less now when i feel size is an issue as the fronts protected.
Dwig
Well-known
The use of a UV filter for "lens protection" began as a marketing scam by dealers looking for needed extra profit when camera discounting began to be significant.
I worked in and ran retail camera stores when this began. The profit margin on filters, particularly those from filter manufactures rather than camera manufacturers, is, or at least was through the mid-'90s when I got out of the business, massive. A UV filter and a strap added to the sale of a $300-600 USD camera would generally double the net profit on the sale. The stores I worked in and ran often gave a "spiff" or commission on a filter or strap sale but not on a camera or lens, too little net profit on the later two.
Filters never add, they always take away.
I worked in and ran retail camera stores when this began. The profit margin on filters, particularly those from filter manufactures rather than camera manufacturers, is, or at least was through the mid-'90s when I got out of the business, massive. A UV filter and a strap added to the sale of a $300-600 USD camera would generally double the net profit on the sale. The stores I worked in and ran often gave a "spiff" or commission on a filter or strap sale but not on a camera or lens, too little net profit on the later two.
Filters never add, they always take away.
japro
Member
I don't use filters, even if I have a lot expensive, large-lensed (is that a word) SLR glass. I never actually managed to get "cleaning marks" on my lenses and the only lens I ever dropped ended up having a blocked AF gear but no damage whatsoever was done to the glass. Also, I have some lenses i bought with scratches for absolute bargain prices. It's the kind of scratches you have to carfully look for, but they are there, and I never noticed any impact on the images taken with them, even if I had the opportunity to test against unscratched identical ones. I have the firm belief, that putting filter in front of your lenses will increase flare problems more, than any small scratch or cleaning mark can.
And since damaging Lenses isn't that easy in the first place (go, get a defect worthless lens off ebay and try to scratch it... The only object in our houshold, that worked was a quarz crystal) I think my lenses are well protected by their hoods. Of course there are situations where a filter makes sense, like when it's very sandy (beach etc.) or the lenses don't have modern robust coatings. So when there is a special reason why a lens would need additional protection, then I'd put a Filter on it. But not all the time, that seems paranoid to me.
And since damaging Lenses isn't that easy in the first place (go, get a defect worthless lens off ebay and try to scratch it... The only object in our houshold, that worked was a quarz crystal) I think my lenses are well protected by their hoods. Of course there are situations where a filter makes sense, like when it's very sandy (beach etc.) or the lenses don't have modern robust coatings. So when there is a special reason why a lens would need additional protection, then I'd put a Filter on it. But not all the time, that seems paranoid to me.
robinsonphotography
Established
I put "naked" but that's not 100% honest. I don't like filters, but just as much I don't like no filters. I like hoods. I get the protection, my glass has nothing in front of it, it's my favorite. Even if I do have a filter (which just is an ND usually, for work with flash) I still like hoods for protection more than anything else--they're a great. Plus, they look cool!
bwcolor
Veteran
I finally got the most out of a filter.
Today was my youngest daughter's fourth birthday. Zeiss Ikon with Leica 90mm APO Asph. draped over my shoulder and behind my right arm. Somehow, it must have become lodged in a piece of cake, because the last half inch of the lens was covered in frosting. I finally found out why I use a filter and for the first and only time found a hidden disadvantage of that sliding built-in hood.
Today was my youngest daughter's fourth birthday. Zeiss Ikon with Leica 90mm APO Asph. draped over my shoulder and behind my right arm. Somehow, it must have become lodged in a piece of cake, because the last half inch of the lens was covered in frosting. I finally found out why I use a filter and for the first and only time found a hidden disadvantage of that sliding built-in hood.
gcrawfo2
Member
I was in the airport last summer and got to a checkpoint and in the middle of trying to put down my bags, my over-the-shoulder camera bag dropped about two feet. It was such a soft hit that I didn't even bother checking the contents (Nikon d90 and 18-200mm VR) until I reached my destination.
Open it up and my UV lens attached to the front of my Nikon 18-200mm was completely shattered and there was glass all in my bag. Actual lens was just a little "dusty" from the broken glass, but in perfect condition. You better believe I was happy to pay $40 for a new 72mm filter than have to buy a brand new $650 lens. I'll keep a filter on the front of all my lenses from here on out...
Open it up and my UV lens attached to the front of my Nikon 18-200mm was completely shattered and there was glass all in my bag. Actual lens was just a little "dusty" from the broken glass, but in perfect condition. You better believe I was happy to pay $40 for a new 72mm filter than have to buy a brand new $650 lens. I'll keep a filter on the front of all my lenses from here on out...