Lens Protection

[Joves]

The Nikon Clears are not all that expensive and, are high quality.

 

[itznfb]

i can't believe people rely on lens hoods to protect their lenses. there is no viable data to show that any filter reduces the quality of an image. and it only takes one little branch to cost hundreds or thousands of damage a $80 filter could have prevented. i could throw a $5 Quantaray filter on my 18-50mm f/2.8 and post a with and without and i guarantee no human could tell the difference; or any analysis software either for that matter. just put a UV or clear on there for protection and be done with it.

canon makes a few protective filters
UV, Haze & Protection

There's also no viable data that any filter has 'saved' a lens either.

Just because a filter shatters doesn't mean the lens would have even been touched.

there are thousands of photographers that have extremely damaged filters with 100% intact and scratch-less front elements. myself and 3 people i often shoot with probably have 20 busted or severely scratched filters just between the 4 of us. hell, i was shooting a dirt rally race and was a good distance away and went through 2 filters just in one day. with absolutely no damage to the front element. there are scratches on the body of the lens and a couple small welts on me but no notable damage to the lens.

 

[manaheim]

^^^ probably depends a lot on what you shoot. I mostly shoot cityscapes, inanimate objects and large buildings.

Until some commercial property starts tossing rocks at me, I'm probably relatively safe.

 

[PhotoXopher]

True, I guess there's a need for something under those and similar circumstances but the general 'I bumped my lens on a wall/tree' or 'I dropped my camera' situations is what I was referring to.

 

[EleanorW]

True, I guess there's a need for something under those and similar circumstances but the general 'I bumped my lens on a wall/tree' or 'I dropped my camera' situations is what I was referring to.

Or, as in my case...tipped the tripod over... :blushing:

 

[PhotoXopher]

Or, as in my case...tipped the tripod over... :blushing:

DOH!

 

[MelissaMarieImagery]

It boils down to a religious issue. There are believers and non-believers (and some agnostics). I put myself on the agnostic fence -- I used to use them and now I don't. It is a question of "How much do I believe they change IQ" vs. "Can I afford a new lens/lens repair if I made the wrong choice". My CP possibly saved my lens, but I'll (thankfully) never know. I do know that I had to pay for a new CP.

This really makes the most sense--

I'd probably kick myself if my lens was messed up by something that could have been saved with a protector on it, and at the same time would also kick myself if my lens was ruined because I had a protector on it that got hit and scratched it.


I would rather just use it, because most of the work I do I'm at like the beach or in the city where it's unlikely anything is really going to be coming at me other than sand or some dirt, in which case I sure don't want that on my lens! I've come home from a shoot at the beach with my lens protector looking absolutely gnarly -- and I sure wouldn't want my actual lens to look that way!

Also, I always use a lens hood and it actually DID save my camera! We were 4-wheeling on the beach and drove over a REALLY steep part of dune/beach/hill whatever.... I was in the front seat just with my camera around my neck- when we came over the top we were going a little too fast and the car hit REALLY hard and lurched everyone and everything to the front of it, including my camera smashing forward into the dashboard. The lens hood smacked into it, and if I didn't have it on I'm sure it would have broken it.

Also, I wear it around my neck a lot and the lens hood sometimes dings into things, and if it wasn't there it would have been my actual lens hitting into it.

 

[itznfb]

^^ keep in mind sand scratches glass very easily.

another simple example and reason to use a filter... i was at the zoo the other day and pointed my lens down to review some shots and a branch sticking out of a bush scratched the hell out of my UV filter. something i should have seen but i just finished getting some nice action shots and wasn't looking for branches below me =\

that one hurt because i use a B+W filter when not under hazardous conditions.

 

[MelissaMarieImagery]

^yes, sand does scratch easily. That's why the protector is so important I would hate to have little scratches all over a bare lens >_<

 

[FrankLamont]

UV filters. MC UV filters.

 

[JerryPH]

^^^ probably depends a lot on what you shoot. I mostly shoot cityscapes, inanimate objects and large buildings.

Until some commercial property starts tossing rocks at me, I'm probably relatively safe.

LOL! Just be wary when you do those urban glamour shots in graffiti covered areas... I've had a homeless guy almost drop his hot coffee on me as he was hanging from his hammock in the rafters!

 

[JerryPH]

UV filters. MC UV filters.

That sounds like "Bond... James Bond" :lmao:

 

[KmH]

are you able to prove filters reduce IQ? because i've never seen proof of such a claim.

Are you able to prove filters protect?

I've never seen proof UV filters 'protect'. Anecdotal evidence is not proof. That your UV filter was scratched does not mean your lens objective would have been. Certainly, you may want to rethink your camera handeling techniques and/or take greater care with your equipment.

I have seen lens objectives scratched from the shards of a shattered UV 'protection' filter though.

 

[Battou]

are you able to prove filters reduce IQ? because i've never seen proof of such a claim.

I could, I have the appropriate "Protective filter" a 77mm opticap window glass filter, unfortunately by the time I got the images processed this thread will be dead and gone. I know full well it reduces IQ, I can literally see it in the viewfinder it's that drastic.

 

[itznfb]

are you able to prove filters reduce IQ? because i've never seen proof of such a claim.

Are you able to prove filters protect?

I've never seen proof UV filters 'protect'. Anecdotal evidence is not proof. That your UV filter was scratched does not mean your lens objective would have been. Certainly, you may want to rethink your camera handeling techniques and/or take greater care with your equipment.

I have seen lens objectives scratched from the shards of a shattered UV 'protection' filter though.

Yes. Actually i could. If i was willing to i could take a pile of sand and scratch my filter. Take off the filter and show the lens element wasn't scratched. Then take that same pile of sand and scratch the lens element.
filter = protection is proven.

Only naive people think that nothing will happen to your lens because you're "careful". Filters are easier to clean, easy to replace and don't negatively effect IQ in any way. So there is no reason not to use them.

Maybe i should take better care of it? I take better care of my equipment than you do apparently. At least i take pro-active measures to protect my equipment. I didn't spend thousands on good camera equipment to use it inside a protective bubble. Things happen. There's no way to avoid it. Maybe you should rethink not protecting your equipment.

are you able to prove filters reduce IQ? because i've never seen proof of such a claim.

I could, I have the appropriate "Protective filter" a 77mm opticap window glass filter, unfortunately by the time I got the images processed this thread will be dead and gone. I know full well it reduces IQ, I can literally see it in the viewfinder it's that drastic.

:er: and I can literally see that it doesn't reduce IQ.