who uses neutral lens filter to protect lens?

i only find B+W 39mm 39 UV MRC 010M BRASS Multi Coated Germany Digital Filter, does the digital make any difference when using on film?
 
sonofdanang said:
1. The myth that filters degrade image quality is only a reality if you use broken bits of bottle glass or other junk.

2. Good quality filters do not degrade image quality. If you go cheap, you might get a propensity for flare and, if you shoot digital, the potential for the sensor being reflected off the back of the filter. Hoya or B+W or Rodenstock are all good. There is a reason some 52mm UV filters are $19.95 and some are $80.00 Do your own research. But as someone else here pointed out, it's cheap insurance. See point number 4 below.

3. While I'm not a wild man, I do not baby my gear. In and out of aeroplanes and helicopters, ground vehicles in the rain and snow, blowing sand etc.. and I do not keep my cameras in cases except when they are being transported separately from me. So there are lots of opportunities for damage. For those of you who keep your camera in a bag or with the lens cap on while you're carrying your camera, try one day or a week of carrying the thing without a case, without a lens cap, just on your shoulder or, even better, in your hand ready to go. With a filter on the lens. You'll be amazed at how many more pictures you see and take and how much longer you can work a subject before you run out of light, inconspicuity, the light or the subject's patience. Just try it. And when you do decide for some bizarre reason to put the camera in a jacket pocket you won't be worried about whatever else is in there grubbing up your front element.

4. I was shooting a potter and her work for a brochure and print advertising. At one point I was shooting the kiln and I had her turn the lights off and the only light was from the kiln. I became fascinated with the colour of the light coming off the elements and so I stuck a lens very close to one of the peep-holes in the side of the kiln. After a few shots I heard a snapping sound and lost a bit of contrast in the viewfinder. A glance at the front of the lens showed the filter cracked and deformed. The girl that makes everything go in my life managed to remove the filter and replace it for me. It was quite warm as you might imagine. So, would you rather that the front element on a $2000 lens or the filter?
Click to expand...
Dear Shane,

I'd agree 99% -- but occasionally, if there is a light source (especially the sun) in frame, I'll pull the protective filter off, because I have seen ghosting/flare.

Something I have never verified, but have been told, is that the longer a lens is (focal length, that is) the more difference a cheap filter makes.

Most people who agonize over image degradation from filters are doing so on theoretical grounds and have never done a controlled test. I have, and so has Ctein, a much better experimentalist than I. Our results bear out what you say, except that I found I needed REALLY bad filters (literally window glass) to introduce degradation other than flare: most $20 filters are actually fine.

Cheers,

R.
 
Jani_from_Finland said:
Never.

If a lens cant take some resistance for scratches, then its a bad lens.
Iäve even once managed to hit my OM Zuiko 18/3.5 (with its heavily bulging lens) against a steel davit onboard a ship, not a mark on the lens. my lux have been w/o a hood tumbling in a bag with metal objects, nothing visible. Rain, water, seawater, salt, sand, gear is for use. If the equipment cant hold upp, then its not up to the standards set for them.
Click to expand...
You have been unbelievably lucky so far, despite being unbelievably careless.

Cheers,

R.
 
Ha ha! Yari I think you just got told off!

I used filters on all my lenses for all the reasons stated so far. Until I got my first DSLR. Then I saw clear differences with and without filters when using a long lens (400mm). Flare/ghosting, reduced sharpness of in focus subjects and difficult to describe nastiness in blurred areas. After that I stopped unless there was good reason (sand, water etc.).

I think age has a lot to do with it (lenses and photographers). Coatings were much softer than they are now and could easily be scratched when cleaning.
 
I stopped using 'protective' filters as a general rule sometime in the early '80s when I noticed that the lenses fitted with filters not only flared a little but seemed to require more frequent cleaning behind the filter.

I use a filter now when conditions warrant it and when I need to filter the light. All my lenses have a sturdy lens hood fitted, all the time. They seem to stay clean for a very long time, and rarely require more than a light dusting off.

G
 
Godfrey said:
I stopped using 'protective' filters as a general rule sometime in the early '80s when I noticed that the lenses fitted with filters not only flared a little but seemed to require more frequent cleaning behind the filter.

I use a filter now when conditions warrant it and when I need to filter the light. All my lenses have a sturdy lens hood fitted, all the time. They seem to stay clean for a very long time, and rarely require more than a light dusting off.

G
Click to expand...
Dear Godfrey,

Highlight 1: Where could the dirt have been coming from? I'm intrigued.

Highlight 2: True enough. There have been times when I haven't git around to buying a filter for a while, or never bother because I don't use the lens constantly with the cap off, and I'm not that worried -- except for the lenses I use all the time 'on the street', particularly my 35/1.4 and 1.5/50. But like you I always use a sturdy shade.

Often, too, I'll use an Op-Tech HoodHat, http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/review optech shower cap.html because it's virtually impossible NOT to notice it's on the camera; it affords excellent protection; it's relatively inexpensive; and it can be pulled off in an instant and stuffed in a pocket or even (if you're in a real hurry) dropped on the floor.

Cheers,

R.
 
As you've seen from the posts here, some do and others don't.
Me?
Shooting for 35 years, and except for a couple of lenses with bent filter rings, they all have Nikon L37c skylights on them.
I don't baby my gear, and mostly shoot on the streets where my cameras are getting bumped, and because I never walk around with lens caps on, filters keep my front elements from getting banged up, scratched or broken.
 
most lenses have German multicoated clear or UV filters, but in the dark lights often cause flare - so take filters off & put them back again afterwards.

lens caps are great, but usually replace original front & rear lens caps with no logo centre pinch lens caps off the bay - no problem then if lost or damaged.

lens tip did a massive review of UV filters back in 2007 & a recent update, the info is still relevant : http://www.lenstip.com/113.4-article-UV_filters_test_Description_of_the_results_and_summary.html

best
alex
 
Roger,

I use the hood hats too, made a couple of my own for oddball lenses/hoods that they don't fit.

Roger Hicks said:
Highlight 1: Where could the dirt have been coming from? I'm intrigued.
Click to expand...

What I saw building up on a regular basis was a very fine dust or powder, almost invisible looking directly through the lens but easily visible if you took off the filter and wiped it with a cloth. Best I can conjecture is that unless the lens and filter are actually sealed to each other, thermal cycling or maybe just the tromboning action of the focusing mount shifting the lens back and forth slowly suck very fine silt through the filter threads and it eventually deposits on the inside surfaces.

How it gets there I'm still a bit perplexed about, but I know before I stopped using filters on a regular basis I was cleaning all my lenses and filters every week as they'd have a light haze visible inside the filter and on the front element. Since I stopped using filters, I dust off a lens with a blower bulb once every few months unless I accidentally do something stupid and get a thumbprint on the front element, or something like that. ;-)

G
 
Most of my filters are clear glass. I've never seen any gain in a UV or skylight, not even on film.
 
Hoya filters all the time on everything as well as hoods. I use cameras and lenses. No I don't abuse them but my normal working environment is such that to get the shots people want and purchase you have to get where it's down and dirty. For me it's cheep economy thinking one is going to get a superior image buy not using a filter for protection when a $2k to $7k lens is leading the way and out front.
 
Haven't read any other post than the OP's.

Any glass surface added to the equation is going to degrade the optical quality of your photo to some degree. I never use UV or other "protective" filters; I simply make sure theres a lens hood on all my lenses. I've travelled around the world a time or two photographing, lenses thrown into a bag and jostled about, and never had scratched a lens.

Then again, I clean my lenses with my T-Shirt.
 
Another Reason for Using Protective Filters

Another Reason for Using Protective Filters

Godfrey said:
Roger,

I use the hood hats too, made a couple of my own for oddball lenses/hoods that they don't fit.



What I saw building up on a regular basis was a very fine dust or powder, almost invisible looking directly through the lens but easily visible if you took off the filter and wiped it with a cloth. Best I can conjecture is that unless the lens and filter are actually sealed to each other, thermal cycling or maybe just the tromboning action of the focusing mount shifting the lens back and forth slowly suck very fine silt through the filter threads and it eventually deposits on the inside surfaces.

How it gets there I'm still a bit perplexed about, but I know before I stopped using filters on a regular basis I was cleaning all my lenses and filters every week as they'd have a light haze visible inside the filter and on the front element. Since I stopped using filters, I dust off a lens with a blower bulb once every few months unless I accidentally do something stupid and get a thumbprint on the front element, or something like that. ;-)

G
Click to expand...

This could be from the ionic "weathering" effect described here:
http://camera-filters.biz/feature_articles/spl03.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom