To Filter or NOT to Filter - That is the question

To Filter or NOT to Filter - That is the question

  • Yes I use UV / Protection Filters

    Votes: 421 58.0%

  • No, I love to shoot naked !!

    Votes: 305 42.0%
  • Total voters
    726
I only buy cheep used lenses and a decent filter will cost me at least half of what the lens cost, so until I can buy something worth a fortune I dont see the point for me.
 
I just bought a B+W UV for my RF645's lenses. I used to shoot with cheapy UV filters, but learned from various sources that using a good quality UV filter is important not only to protect the lens from junk, but because it can make a difference when shooting landscapes, etc. The Real use of mine is just to protect my priceless 45mm lens - and I had the guy at Glazer's Camera, the only one there who I actually think is any good at his job, tell me that it's worth it.
 
This topic comes up from time to time on different forums. Both sides are defended with religious fever. My personal preference is for filters for protection. It works for me and I do it on most of my lenses. Ed Romney says in his book on Basic Photographic Repair, something like 'keep the lens clean, don't keep cleaning the lens.' As I said, it works for me. For those who prefer no filters, good for you as long as you are happy with it. It sure isn't worth fighting over, just expressing each one's own personal opinion. Now I have done that.
 
I'm kinda 'functional' in filter application. I agree lenses can get scratched so I'll use a UV to protect. However I also agree that one more sheet of glass has to have some effect. So if I'm taking a 'serious' shot I'll take the UV off.

When shooting BW I'll often use a yellow, dark yellow, orange, green, or red filter for a specific effect given by those filters. With PS I can now tweak the image by boosting contrast.

I have no religion when it comes to these discussions, even the comment about a $40 Oly RC and "who cares, I'll buy another if the lens gets scratched" I can agree with.

Having written all this I don't use them a lot but I do use them as I see a specific application.
 
Filters are for the effect!

Filters are for the effect!

I only use filters when I want the effect. Of course when I'm in an area that could hurt my lens, such as on a boat with lots of salt spray, or in a dust storm, the effect I want is to protect the front element.
I do always use a lens shade. This affords significant protection as well as increasing contrast and reducing flare under certain conditions. Besides, a good shade looks cool! (IMHO)
 
Filters, neck straps and bags are high-profit accessories that a store sales clerk wants you to buy. A lens with a smashed filter mounted on the front looks good on the counter and helps motivate you to make that purchase.

If an environment does not call for the wearing of protective eyewear, why would a glass element need protection? Ok, people obsess about cleaning their lenses so the filter does protect it from cleaning marks. :p

R.J.
 
I think I would only use a UV/Protection filter if I had to shoot in driving rain or snow or a sandstorm (sometimes even in Boston we have windy late winter/early spring days with high winds, and the sand left over on the roads from snowstorm treatment flies like tiny shards of glass). Mostly I leave them off so as not to compromise the lens optics.

My only scratched lens element came about because of a lens filter. Walking along at night I tripped over a movable sign I didn't see. I had a backpack with a Nikon N8008 with a 105mm/2.8 AF Micro lens on it, supposedly protected by an L37c filter, and cap. The pack slipped over my shoulder, hit the brick sidewalk, and the filter shattered. The broken glass nicked several places in the front element. Fortunately, SK Grimes of Boston fixed the lens to good as new with a replacement front element. The filter may have prevented damage to the barrel of the lens.

I do use colored filters shooting B&W landscapes, but these days that is my primary use of the things.
 
I religiously use filters. I use Multi Coated Heliopan and B+W. Why? To protect the lenses. I live in Southern California and will shoot in any condition really. But the number one thing I probably use my rangefinders for is beach and street. Streets often by a beach. I do not need sand scratching my lenses. As for SLR’s, I shoot speedway racing mainly. And with how much grit and clay hits my lenses… I would be a fool to have to replace more than my UV filters.

If you are in a place without such issue… I could see skipping them. But I am not. I like beaches and desert too much… both of which are bad for glass:)
 
Consider the flowers of the field (through a sheet of glass), in their beauty, More lovely than even the clothes of a king.
Prefer the original
:D :D
 
New tripod (tilting head), new Nikorex, concrete flowerpot.
DING!
Used a filter on most every other lens after that.
I've only got one eye and I wear safety glasses, so does the camera.
 
Yellow-Green filter almost 100% of the time when shooting b&w.
The only time I take it off is if I shoot colour - or if I need the additional speed.
 
I've decided that putting a good UV filter on the lens is absolutely necessary.

After spending a day using a camera without a filter - because the air seemed clear of dust and moisture - I came home and found that the lens had been dusted with some sort of mist, and waterspots had become part of the coating. Perhaps it wasn't just a mist of water. Big cities you never know.

Bottom line : wear a filter. A good one. B+W is the lowest I'll go, and that's pretty high. I think I bought B+W multicoated filters for all my RF zenzanons.
 
shutterflower said:
A good one. B+W is the lowest I'll go, and that's pretty high.
Click to expand...

If B+W is the lowest you've gone what is better than B+W then?
 
Rich Silfver said:
If B+W is the lowest you've gone what is better than B+W then?
Click to expand...


Like your avatar. Nice.

I've heard that Heliopan filters aren't too bad.

Really, I don't know what I'm talking about - I just know that B+W are good - and noticeably better than the Tiffens I used to use.

ONE thing, is that the multicoated filters are hard to wipe clean. The coating is . . . squeaky. Mine is, at least. It has grip. Not the plain glass of the tiffen, so blowing it clean with a can of air is easiest.
 
You will usually find a yellow green filter on my rangefinder du jour,
loaded with black and white.
And there's usually a polarizer on the Pentax loaded with Kodachrome.

Simplify!
-Chris-
 
Andrew Touchon said:
I use B+W MRC UV filters on all of my lenses. I have not noticed any problems with flare. However, I would not use the the less expensive non multicoated filters. Any slight decrease in lens performance is worth the peace of mind that the extra protection the filters provide.
Click to expand...


Super ditto. use B+W MRC UV only to avoid flare.
 
no filters for me. used to use yellow a lot, but haven't in years. As for protection?
eh.....I usually only bring oone camera one lens to shoot and am pretty careful with it so Im not concerned. I clean my lens before going out and during shooting with lens tissue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom