paigew
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,881
- Reaction score
- 1,831
- Location
- Texas (Hill Country)
- Website
- www.paigewilks.com
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
I have never used a filter on my lenses.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Can only say they've spared pricey-rare-favorite optics from harm on more than a few occasions.
I used too, until I saw pictures of comparisons with and without. Even with cheaper lenses (assuming lower quality). A direct hit to the main lens caused very little marks on the glass (using slide hammer, I think 3# slide). But a lens with a cheap filter on the front. Would get several marks (from the broken glass of the protector hitting and marking the good lens glass). The test lenses were all MF lenses from different brands. Would have several of each one (same exact lens). One would get the filter, and other would have nothing. Believe it or not, the lens barrel / actual lens piece mount would break more often than the glass (again the cheaper lenses). So, for the most part just chips in the glass were the worst, until they used more force than just letting the slide fall on the slide hammer.
After I saw that article. I thought to myself. How thick is that filter. They are all pretty thin actually. They actually take less abuse than the lens itself. And when they break, cause more damage than if it had not been there in terms of marks on the lens.
Can only say they've spared pricey-rare-favorite optics from harm on more than a few occasions.
Until you do side by side comparisons you have no idea that it saved anything.
I used too, until I saw pictures of comparisons with and without. Even with cheaper lenses (assuming lower quality). A direct hit to the main lens caused very little marks on the glass (using slide hammer, I think 3# slide). But a lens with a cheap filter on the front. Would get several marks (from the broken glass of the protector hitting and marking the good lens glass). The test lenses were all MF lenses from different brands. Would have several of each one (same exact lens). One would get the filter, and other would have nothing. Believe it or not, the lens barrel / actual lens piece mount would break more often than the glass (again the cheaper lenses). So, for the most part just chips in the glass were the worst, until they used more force than just letting the slide fall on the slide hammer.
After I saw that article. I thought to myself. How thick is that filter. They are all pretty thin actually. They actually take less abuse than the lens itself. And when they break, cause more damage than if it had not been there in terms of marks on the lens.
I remember a similar article and it made perfect sense to me not to have an additional thing that could shatter into my expensive glass.
Filters have saved front elements and/or lens-side filter rings on at least a half dozen of my lenses. And no, they didn't shatter. Try acquainting yourself with evidence-based discussion sometime. Cicala is pretty good at it. You're plainly not.
Filters have saved front elements and/or lens-side filter rings on at least a half dozen of my lenses. And no, they didn't shatter. Try acquainting yourself with evidence-based discussion sometime. Cicala is pretty good at it. You're plainly not.
An evidence based discussion is what was lacking in your post. I was just pointing out that if you don't do comparisons with and without a filter it is merely speculation that the filter protected anything.
I am always amazed at how many lenses come into our store to have the broken filters removed and how delighted our customers are when they find out the filter saved their lens.
I am always amazed at how many lenses come into our store to have the broken filters removed and how delighted our customers are when they find out the filter saved their lens.
I'd be curious on what caused these broken filters and what damaged the filters would have damaged the lens. Also if a lens hood would have prevented it. Can you give use some of the causes?
I find it curious how many people attribute a cheap filter as having "saved" their lens when the do not know it to be true. But there is more profit in pushing cheap filters rather than pushing the using of the OEM hood ALWAYS. Len's hoods provide protection. Protection from stray light as well as protection from objects, bumps and drops.I am always amazed at how many lenses come into our store to have the broken filters removed and how delighted our customers are when they find out the filter saved their lens.
I'd be curious on what caused these broken filters and what damaged the filters would have damaged the lens. Also if a lens hood would have prevented it. Can you give use some of the causes?
At least 75% are from dropped cameras where the lens hit the ground first. Also I have noticed that most do not use a lens hood.