Is it ok to keep a UV filter on, all the time?

[molested_cow]

I have it on all the time. If I am getting bad lens flare or ghost, I will just take the filter off and retake the shot.

 

[jake337]

Never put them on any of my lens. Maybe a CPL or ND filter.

 

[MReid]

Only time you may conceivably need a uv filter is if you are at the ocean on a windy day and want to keep salt spray off your lens or if you are working in an environment like motorcross or rodeo where rocks could get tossed into your lens.

If my lens gets dirty I breath on it and wipe it off with a cotton shirt, good to go. I leave my lens cap on all the time, even between shots.

 

[analog.universe]

I use them like 99% of the time, because I prefer to keep stuff off the front element. I walk around a lot outside with the lenscap off (it takes long enough to get the camera to my eye for some shots, never mind reaching inside the hood and taking a cap off), and I shoot in active kitchens, and I frequently have pet noses bumping the lens, so it's a peace of mind thing for me. Maybe the front elements can take it, maybe not. I did do a flare test, and concluded that on most of my lenses, with Heliopan SH-PMC or B+W MRC Nano UV's, no additional flare was visible most of the time. My Tokina 11-16 likes to flare, and filters make it worse, even good ones, so I take the filter off when it's relevant. But, for my 24, 35, and 50, I really need to make an effort to get flare, and having the filter on doesn't seem to make any difference.

 

[Dao]

- I do not use UV filter.
- I do have UV filters (bought the lens used and it came with the lens. BW, Hoya etc)
- I do not see any issue so far with my lens without filters
- I think if buying a $100 plus filter to protect a $600 or less lens do not make sense (at least to me). Get a $30 or less filter ... may as well don't get it. I'd rather buy a $30 steak dinner.
- I do respect others who use them. It is just not for me.

 

[KmH]

Lens protection is way more about using good lens/camera handeling technique and the proper lens cleaning methods and tools.

Filters (clear or UV) used for 'protection' cause more problems than they solve. The filters increase the occurance of lens flare becuase of the additional air gap they add to the lens, and reduce image contrast to some extent.

A TPF member posted a thread a couple of months ago - She dropped her lens and the UV filter she had on it for 'protection' shattered. One of the sharp shards of thin, easily broken UV filter glass gouged the very lens it was supposed to 'protect'. Her story is far from unique and similar 1st person stories have been repeated on other forums from time to time. Sorry, I can't find the thread.
Often the issue is the inability to remove a shattered UV filter from the lens, because the filter body has bent and is jammed in the lens filter threads. - http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ens-pouring-rain-today-filter-stuck-lens.html

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ed-nikon-d700-camea-lens-saved-uv-filter.html

Check out this article from a lens rental business about scratched lenses - LensRentals.com - Front Element Scratches

and watch this video:

 

[apples]

i recently used one to shoot some streets during the st. paddys parades, didnt notice a massive dropoff in quality and my glass was clean throught the entire day (drunk guys and beer everywhere).

UV filter used for its designed purpose: near useless.
used for protection: use at your own discretion.

 

[Alex_B]

I used to have B+W UV-Filters on my lenses, but with the advent of digital I gave up on that. Often a Lens hood offers some extra protection!

I do outdoor photography where you run into many nasty branches, sand and all that ... and I never had a problem with a lens getting damaged.

Only once I ruined an expensive gradient filter as it was blown onto a rock in heavy wind. But that is a different story

 

[bentcountershaft]

I'll stay out of the filter/no filter debate and say that if you choose to keep it on all the time I would make sure you can take it off every once in a while. I've seen countless threads of people that have left them on so long they get stuck.

 

[analog.universe]

I'll stay out of the filter/no filter debate and say that if you choose to keep it on all the time I would make sure you can take it off every once in a while. I've seen countless threads of people that have left them on so long they get stuck.

This is also quality related. The aluminum rings are much more likely to seize than the brass ones.

 

[brush]

I know the internet is no place for logic...but don't you guys think if a UV filter was meant to protect your lens, it would be called a lens shield instead of a UV filter? Things aren't arbitrarily named on cameras...the polarizing filter blocks light in a polarized pattern. The neutral density filter blocks light at a neutral density. The UV filter blocks UV light. The gadget bag holds gadgets. Crazy how they define these things, isn't it?

My thought, as crazy as it may sound, use your equipment for what its intended and it'll serve you well. Every time UV light is going to damage your shot, go right ahead & put a UV filter on your camera (aka never). Every time the glare of a cars paint is screwing up your shot, put a circular polarizing filter on & filter out the glare. Every time you need to stop down the light a bit, put an ND filter on.

So many people say they're using filters to protect their lens, I use this thing that I treat like sort of an insurance policy for my lenses...it's called an insurance policy. For $35 a year all my photog gear is covered against damage theft accident water fire stupidity defect or anything else. It's like a policy that insures my gear...what would you call a thing like that?

 

[Dao]

I'll stay out of the filter/no filter debate and say that if you choose to keep it on all the time I would make sure you can take it off every once in a while. I've seen countless threads of people that have left them on so long they get stuck.

This is also quality related. The aluminum rings are much more likely to seize than the brass ones.

I also heard someone use pencil to write/rub on the filter thread before put the filter on to act as a lubricant for easy filter removal later.

 

[Tee]

So many people say they're using filters to protect their lens, I use this thing that I treat like sort of an insurance policy for my lenses...it's called an insurance policy. For $35 a year all my photog gear is covered against damage theft accident water fire stupidity defect or anything else. It's like a policy that insures my gear...what would you call a thing like that?

I completely agree on your thoughts of using the gear for what it's intended for. However, many camera shops/ Best Buy use the $10 UV filter purchase as a selling point for protecting your lens. The buyer doesn't really learn what a UV filter is for only that it'll protect the outside of your lens. That's what they remember.

 

[usayit]

The concept of using a UV filter to protect lenses has been around for decades before digital.... its pure semantics at that point and really doesnt change anything. Its for the same reason that we still talk of FOV in terms of the well known 35mm/135 negative. The same reason why in the US we can say driveway and people automatically know its for parking. etc...

I wish I can insure my gear against any and all damage no matter how small for only $35. My homeowners insurance policy for the items stored at home are several times that.

 

[chrisv2]

Thanks for all the replies - I think I get it now. I need a second UV filter to protect the first UV filter, which is protecting my lens!

(just kidding)

I'm a total newbie to photography but I do understand the concept that less is better in terms of pieces of glass between the silicon and the subject being photographed...I will try to live without a UV filter and be careful about handling my camera. I also have a lens hood so maybe that's a good enough answer.