To filter or not to filter

[Nici]

I know there is much substance for ND fitters and Gradient Filters. The UV protection filters are manly used as protection from breakage and scratches to the mostly very expensive lenses. There is also much debate as to how much sharpness is compromised in using the UV protectors. We all know more glass equals less sharpness. I have always used UV protectors and all my lenses are equipped with one, but after taking the UV protector off my prime Nikon 35mm lens, I could definitely see a difference. With kit lenses and the cheaper zoom lenses, wouldn't it make even more of a difference to the sharpness and overall satisfaction of a decent, sharp shot. What are the views out there.. Would love to hear what others think...

 

[Overread]

Few thoughts:
1) Modern DSLRS don't need UV light filtration to take place as they have their own built in filters and coatings on the lens. You might need a UV filter to filter out the UV light if you are shooting at very high altitudes where the UV content is higher.
As such a clear glass filter is just as effective for protection.

2) A filter of any kind will only offer production against dust, light liquids (rain) and very small particles. It won't stop stones or sticks and if it shatters will actually cause more damage because:
a) You've got shattered glass from the filter scratching the front element
b) You run the risk that if dropped the filter thread will buckle and get stuck on the lens.

3) Filter glass is VERY think whilst front element glass on most lenses is actually significantly thicker. The result is a knock or bump that shatters the filter likely would not have done much to the lens elements - of course point 2a comes to the fore if you've just shattered your filter.

4) Filters come in many grades and many cheap ones are low grade and thus will affect your image quality; some of the worst can even confuse AF systems.
In general if you're going to use them use high end options which will have a negligible effect on image quality (esp after editing).

I'd use a filter for protection if I were shooting on a very sandy beach in good wind just so that I could wipe the element clean of sand without worrying about scratches. I wouldn't bother with a protection filter for general use as general situations that cause likely damage will exceed what the filter can protect from and often just having the lens hood on is enough protection from many things.

 

[weepete]

I don't use them, they can cause more issues than they solve.

Lenses in my mind are tools and there is going to be some wear and tear on them, sometimes a bit of damage is unavoidable but they are pretty durable.

But if you really want to keep that lens in top condition don't take it out of the box. Hell, stick the box in a protective box and put it on a shelf, never take it out and you can rest assured that you'll be keeping it in the best condition possible.

 

[Designer]

With kit lenses and the cheaper zoom lenses, wouldn't it make even more of a difference to the sharpness and overall satisfaction of a decent, sharp shot. What are the views out there.. Would love to hear what others think...

There is a difference in quality among filters of any type, so if one chooses to put a filter on the front, you should use the best quality that you can afford. Better filters are made of optically better glass, made flatter, and are coated with better coatings.

The anti-reflective coatings however are much softer than glass. Protecting the coatings on the front element makes some sense, but even a good filter will not protect the coatings if it is smashed into the coatings upon breaking. The glass of the front element is pretty tough. Besides; small chips and scratches will have a fairly minimal effect on the image being captured.

The effect of a filter will not have a greater effect on a cheap lens than a more expensive lens, it will be the same effect on the image. Not having to be overly concerned about the coatings on your cheap lens just makes it easier and more carefree to make photographs without having to worry about whether there is a filter on it.

 

[astroNikon]

I put tightly stretched saran-wrap over my Heliopan UV-IR multi-coated filter to protect the filter from dust and scratches.

okay, not really.

If you want to use a filter buy the best one that you can and not the 3 pack filters for $15.99 off of amazon shipped from HongKong/China for free. Go to a camera website and look at those. Adorama, BHphotography, etc instead.

 

[DarkShadow]

I couldn't pick because you left the option out to buy one and use it for a beverage coaster or as a mini frisbee.

 

[table1349]

Using a UV filter for "Protection" is like a eunuch using a condom to prevent pregnancy. This is not a space shuttle, redundancy is not required.

 

[pixmedic]

I use filters for protection all the time.

Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk

 

[xenskhe]

Nici have a read here:
Are digital sensors sensitive to UV?

If I use one on a digital it's to reduce UV. The potential loss of sharpness would be negligible among other factors that might be an influence (handshake, misfocus). If a camera and lens aren't on a strap around my neck/shoulder, they're (lens facing upward) in a shoulder bag, wrapped in a pashmina, and with a lens shade fitted.

 

[The_Traveler]

If your images are good, why would you dick around trying to find yet some other device to affect your image and light transmission?

The camera is a tool to make an image.
The camera is not the item of worship.

 

[Nici]

I don't use them, they can cause more issues than they solve.

Lenses in my mind are tools and there is going to be some wear and tear on them, sometimes a bit of damage is unavoidable but they are pretty durable.

But if you really want to keep that lens in top condition don't take it out of the box. Hell, stick the box in a protective box and put it on a shelf, never take it out and you can rest assured that you'll be keeping it in the best condition possible.[/QU

 

[Nici]

I don't use them, they can cause more issues than they solve.

Lenses in my mind are tools and there is going to be some wear and tear on them, sometimes a bit of damage is unavoidable but they are pretty durable.

But if you really want to keep that lens in top condition don't take it out of the box. Hell, stick the box in a protective box and put it on a shelf, never take it out and you can rest assured that you'll be keeping it in the best condition possible.[/QU

Thank you for your feedback. Although your comment gave me a grin at the end, you are absolutely correct in what you say... and since I've gotten so far to take camera and lens out of the box, I can just as well go the extra mile in believing I am able to take good care of both without sacrificing image quality.

 

[Derrel]

No need for a UV filter for protection. Buy a high-quality circular polarizer filter. Cheap polarizers can be pretty bad sharpness robbers. I used to sell photo and video equipment years ago. Filters were always sold as a way to, "Protect your investment." That is because we got a $12 spiff for selling a $2.29 filter for $29.95. Filters have exceptionally high markups on them.

If you think a filter "protects" a lens, that's not really true. YouTube has a nice video demo showing how incredibly WEAK a thin, flat plane sheet of optical glass is. In pretty well-controlled drop tests, the video maker shows that filters break quite easily when struck.

Watch as this fellow takes a broken Canon 50mm f/1.8 EF-II, the Iffy Fifty, and pounds on it. Do you think a filter is needed to protect against an accidental finger-smudge, or an errant dog tongue? Or against a mean old soda straw protruding from a McDonald's cup?

 

[fmw]

Nici have a read here:
Are digital sensors sensitive to UV?

If I use one on a digital it's to reduce UV. The potential loss of sharpness would be negligible among other factors that might be an influence (handshake, misfocus). If a camera and lens aren't on a strap around my neck/shoulder, they're (lens facing upward) in a shoulder bag, wrapped in a pashmina, and with a lens shade fitted.

It might be valuable to know that a UV filter is just plain, clear, flat optical glass. All glass filters some UV light, including the glass in lens. No, UV filters have no effect on image quality except in very rare circumstances.

 

[Nici]

If your images are good, why would you dick around trying to find yet some other device to affect your image and light transmission?

The camera is a tool to make an image.
The camera is not the item of worship.

Harsh word but great perspective. Thank you... This is indeed food for thought and I appreciate your feedback.