Is there much difference between UV filters...

[hacksaw35]

I need to get a UV filter to help protect my new lens and have noticed that prices range from $10 to $100. I think I paid $25 for my last one.
Is there really that much of a difference between them? What do you guys recommend?

One more thought...would an item like this have "fakes" on ebay?

 

[Sideburns]

Ya, there's lots of fake/crappy stuff on ebay. Good filters are usually much better than cheap ones. Cheap ones add glare, flare, and weird colouration to lots of photos. Spend the money on something good, and you won't regret it.

 

[soylentgreen]

I was told by a wiseman once "that your lens is only as good as the cheapest piece of glass." That being said, glass is not optically clear. There are processes, films, layers, etc. that help to make glass as clear as possible by correcting this, tweaking that, enhancing this etc. That is where the higher prices of "Multi-coated" "Digital Enhanced" filters come in. Supposedly. A good UV filter will help cut down on the hazing on really sunny days. If it performs better than the $20 is purely judgemental. I am sure there is probably an article out on this very subject with the scientific data to back it up. Buy the one priced in the middle range.

 

[boris152]

Take a look in the front of those expensive lenses you own. See the pretty multi-colored reflections? The crazy colors come from the coatings on the individual glass elements. If the manufacturer for the lens went to all that trouble (and Nikon lenses are low on the voodoo and high on the quality), then I believe it pays to use similarly high-tech filters, or you're just lowering the quality of what should be a great light catcher.