Some UV Filter truth.

[ann]

Everyone is entitled to their view point. My choice is not to use a uv filter, altho, i never, and i mean never use a lens without a lens hood. We all chose what is important for our methods.

I am sure if i took a loupe to an older lens, altho, i don't have one from when i was 10 left, there would be small markings; however, it is what is on the other end of the lens that is important.

Frankly I find youtube a bore and video as well, and so I can't or won"t be providing a video of anything.

As a point in fact, i began doing darkroom work and taking pictures when i was 10 and am now 73 and still going strong, still working, still selling and many like my work, and photography is suited to the young at heart regardless of the date on a birth certifcate.

 

[Josh66]

Well, not to be rude or anything, but I don't use a rifle scope on my camera. Yes, they are both lenses, and might have similar coatings - but I don't think I could quite say that they are cleaned in the same way.
Most hunters probably don't look much farther than whatever t-shirt they're wearing.

Surely the solvents used in routine gun cleaning are not good for whatever coatings are on the scope... I don't know about you, but I don't use gun cleaning solvents on my camera. Yeah, I know - nobody would try to clean the scope with that, but I'm sure it still gets on it.

I don't think I said that Ann hasn't produced anything worth while. She probably has. I said that if I haven't in 60 years time, I'll give up photography and move on to something better suited to my age.

OK, technically you did say that if you had nothing to show for it that you would move on, but it seemed to imply that she had gone 60 years with nothing to show for it.

60 years???????? I can assure you that if I go half that long in photography and have nothing to show for it, I'll quit and move on to shuffleboard.

Sorry if I misinterpreted it.
(Really, no sarcasm intended.)

 

[LightSpeed]

Everyone is entitled to their view point. My choice is not to use a uv filter, altho, i never, and i mean never use a lens without a lens hood. We all chose what is important for our methods.

I am sure if i took a loupe to an older lens, altho, i don't have one from when i was 10 left, there would be small markings; however, it is what is on the other end of the lens that is important.

Frankly I find youtube a bore and video as well, and so I can't or won"t be providing a video of anything.

As a point in fact, i began doing darkroom work and taking pictures when i was 10 and am now 73 and still going strong, still working, still selling and many like my work, and photography is suited to the young at heart regardless of the date on a birth certifcate.

I was always taught to respect my elders. Nothing about that has changed. I'm certain that you're a wealth of knowledge to the photography world. I apologize if you feel I have insulted you. I'm trying to do the right thing here. Sometimes that's not easy to do but think I've made a step in the right direction.

 

[kundalini]

For protection of my front element, I use the proper lens hood, being aware of my surroundings and common sense.

Filter? I ain't got no filter. I don't need no stinkin' filter.

 

[Dao]

My personal experience:

I found that I do not need to clean my front lens element that often. ( I have not clean my walk around Tamron lens for at least 6 months ... I guess ... it's been awhile) because it doesn't affect my photos for the way I shoot (some dust or little smudge).


For the lens I often use CPL, forget it, no UV on the lens. Too much trouble for me to take it out, put the CPL on and then reverse the process after I done with the CPL (yeah .. I am lazy)

 

[Chamelion 6]

Just because you don't see a scratch doesn't mean it's not there. Every time you clean your lens your are using an abrasive against the surface. The glass is tough, the coatings are not and are going to wear through relatively quickly. Over time your going to polish the surface to a different contour which is going to affect focus, and the millions, and billions of microscopic scratches in the surface are going to degrade the resolution as they distort the light passing through them... Eventually that $1700 lens is going to reach a stage that it's performing worse than a lens with a $10 piece of glass over it.

The process is unavoidable. The extent that it affects your images depends on how often you clean the lens and what you use. Whether you notice the degredation is a matter of how critical you are when you study your images.

I believe in using decent quality UV filters to protect the coatings and I believe in replacing them regularly, in fact, any filter that sees a lot of use should be replaced from time to time.

 

[ann]

The only reason I even mentioned 60 years was to say in all that time i had never damaged or had a lens damaged even when not using a uv filter.

Yes, i agree, as i said before i am sure with a loupe i would find some minor scratches, but those had not interfered with the quality of the image nor in it's re-sell value. When i have traded in a lens it always brought top dollar with my dealer as i take care of my equipment.

For those who want to use a UV filter , use it. When i do use filters with LF work, they are gels and don't remind on the lens anylonger than necessary to make the image and believe me they are delicate little creatures.

I chose not to use a uv filter for protection, that is my decision and my responsibility and if a lens was damaged , then that is my problem.

Bitter got any more popcorn, i have run out of beer.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

 

[Chamelion 6]

Ann, you are very much correct that it's a personal choice. And as passionate as people get over it I don't think there is a right answer.

Here's a question to ponder, and seriously think about it. Does a liberal coating of dirt, oil and debris really degrade the image less than an extra piece of decent photographic glass in fron't of the element?

I'm personally banking on the idea that the glass degrades the image less provided it's kept clean and replaced regularly. Can I prove it? No... But it drives me nuts to see all that crap on my lens...

But the reality, filter or no, in the real world most of our lenses are performing well below their theoretical ideal. It's just a matter of picking your poision.

 

[Josh66]

Do you clean the filter? If you do, it's pretty much a moot point...

Dirt on the filter or dirt on the lens ... who cares, it's still dirt.


EDIT
I guess it's just a question of how much you trust the lens coatings to hold up to periodic cleanings. Personally, I trust them.

 

[Derrel]

Lens front elements are very fragile, delicate things, that must be protected at all costs. Take a look at this video, and see for yourself just how vulnerable the front element of even an economy $99 Canon EF lens is. It's simply shocking!

 

[Chamelion 6]

Do you clean the filter? If you do, it's pretty much a moot point...

Dirt on the filter or dirt on the lens ... who cares, it's still dirt.

I do... Often. It's a compulsion, I can't stand goo on the lens. But I replace the filter about once a year because of wear.

I can't offer any proof it's a better method, but it gives me piece of mind.

 

[Chamelion 6]

Lens front elements are very fragile, delicate things, that must be protected at all costs. Take a look at this video, and see for yourself just how vulnerable the front element of even an economy $99 Canon EF lens is. It's simply shocking!

YouTube - Canon Glass

True maybe. But again, just cause you can't see the damage with the naked eye doesn't mean it's not there, and microscopic irregularities can effect the quality of the image.

Otherwise there would be no difference in a $99 budget lens and a $8000 high end piece of glass... After all, just looking at them, they look the same.

 

[Josh66]

What do you do with the old ones? I think it was Derrel that suggested using UV filters for coasters, lol.

Ever compare one of the old ones (say, the very first one) to one of the new ones?

 

[sobolik]

Lens front elements are very fragile, delicate things, that must be protected at all costs. Take a look at this video, and see for yourself just how vulnerable the front element of even an economy $99 Canon EF lens is. It's simply shocking!

YouTube - Canon Glass

This is awesome I will be right over to beat on your lenses with my hammer. I'm sure your confidence will not be bothered in the slightest.