To Filer or Not To Filter, That is the Question

[sabbath999]

A couple of months ago, I bought a new 70-200 2.8 VR. Dropped $1700 on the puppy with shipping and taxes.

First thing I did was put a UV filter on it.

Went to a zoo to shoot some shots, slapped the lens hood on and started walking around. When I got to the zebras, one bit another one on the ass, and the one that got bit jumped and stomped, right in a big puddle of mud.

Pfwap! Mud came flying and I got splattered.

Sure enough, one big semi-solid glob of mud slammed into my lens right exactly dead center (lens hood and all).

I tell you what... I would have absolutely puked on the spot had that gritty, grimy, zebra peed in mud been slobbered all over the front of my brand new lens instead of some $40 filter.

I come from a sports news background, where I have had my camera covered in all kinds of stuff including spit, blood, rain and an ocean of sweat from some athlete running into me.

I always, always, always shoot with a filter. Always.

 

[Sideburns]

Just so we're clear. I'm not a macho man saying don't do it. Just realize that it will affect image quality if you don't get a nice filter. If I could afford filters right now, I'd go out and get some B&W filters...but I have $0....