What is the effect of UV Filter?

[nonamexx]

I've seen this recommended by some people, but on wikipedia I read that it is basically simply used to protect the lens these days, as there is no effect on the film or the sensor. Is it a good idea to keep a UV filter on the lens all the time? While it may help protect the lens from dust in outdoor conditions will it have any negative impact on the actual photographs?

Should I buy a UV filter along with a kit of other filters? If the filter is advertised for screwing on 18-55mm lens, can it also be used with the 18-135 kit lens? Can UV filter be used with a lens hood?

Canon EOS 550D.

 

[tirediron]

On film, it will reduce UV haze, on digital camearas, it's not necessary since digital cameras have UV filters built in to the high-pass filter assembly. There are two schools of thought on the "protection" aspect. Those who are for it really believe in it, my opinion is that any unnecessary item between subject and sensor should be avoided.

 

[snowbear119 50]

Circular filters are sized by their diameter, and will fit any lens with a matching front diameter. For example, my three prime lenses all have a filter size (diameter) of 52mm, so they will all take the same filter. The filter size should be listed in the lens specs on the manufacturer's web site. You can also get adapter rings to use a larger filter on a lens.

If the lens hood is the type that snaps onto the outside of the lens, and the filters are round (threads onto the inside of the lens) then you should be able to use the filters with the hood attached. There are square filters whose holders will prevent you from using a hood, but the round ones should be OK.

I won't comment on whether they are useful for digital -- a much too religious topic for me (like raw v. jpeg, Nikon v. Canon, or ball head v. pan head)

 

[TATTRAT]

On film, it will reduce UV haze, on digital camearas, it's not necessary since digital cameras have UV filters built in to the high-pass filter assembly. There are two schools of thought on the "protection" aspect. Those who are for it really believe in it, my opinion is that any unnecessary item between subject and sensor should be avoided.

just curious, why? What harm does it do, and it's certainly easier to replace a $15 UV filter than a lens. A lot, including myself, think of it as cheap insurance. I am not sure what it takes to scratch a front element, but I'd rather screw up a filter if it came down to it.

 

[kathyt]

My UV filter saved my 24-70L lens from being shattered on a concrete floor. That counts for something.

 

[TATTRAT]

My UV filter saved my 24-70L lens from being shattered on a concrete floor. That counts for something.

It saved my 11-16 2.8. Had the cap on, dog came by, took out my set up, couldn't get the lens cap off after the fall and all I heard was glass. . . got home, pried the cap off, it was just the UV filter that was broke. Lens is still being used just fine today. I thank that UV filter.

 

[nonamexx]

I've seen a lot of opinions, but no examples on how the UV filter can degrade quality of image. Can somebody post an example if they have one, of a photo taken with and without a UV filter and how it makes a difference?

 

[480sparky43 42]

I've seen a lot of opinions, but no examples on how the UV filter can degrade quality of image. Can somebody post an example if they have one, of a photo taken with and without a UV filter and how it makes a difference?

There's several threads from noobs who posted images that they couldn't figure out where the bright blobs were coming from. Once they removed the filter, everything was fine.

 

[snowbear119 50]

Of course, the filter probably isn't very expensive, so you could just get it and see how it works out for you. You might decide to shoot film, in which case you're good to go. If you see degradation in your digital pics, just take the filter off when you shoot, and put it back on when you're done.

 

[nonamexx]

Thanks. is it better value to get a UV filter as a set of filters than individually? Not sure what filters I will use though!

 

[bratkinson]

I've seen a lot of opinions, but no examples on how the UV filter can degrade quality of image. Can somebody post an example if they have one, of a photo taken with and without a UV filter and how it makes a difference?

Perhaps the 'ultimate' UV filter test was done by Roger Cicala at Lens Rentals.com:

LensRentals.com - Good Times with Bad Filters

 

[Garbz]

It's not so much that UV is blocked by the filter on the sensor, but rather standard CCDs and CMOS chips aren't actually sensitive to UV light. They are to near-IR light and hence the filter to block infrared, but making a CCD that is sensitive in UV wavelengths involves quite a bit of extra engineering.

 

[AaronLLockhart]

UV Filter on dSLR = Dust cap and lens protector.

 

[480sparky43 42]

Back in my film days, I owned 4 cameras and a stable of 18 lenses. All but three of them had a UV or Skylight filter on them (the fisheye, 300 and 500 didn't have filter threads). When I sold all my film gear years ago for lack of use, the lenses were sold with the filters still on them, some of them had never been removed since the day I purchased them and installed the filter.

When I started into digital, I followed suit. Then I had an epiphany. In all my film years (~25 years worth!), I never ONCE replaced any of those filters. Each filter on the film lenses I sold was just as scratch free when I sold it as when I purchased it. And this was back when I was shooting for a living.

Today, I still have those UV filters in the bag, but I have yet to feel the need to install one regardless of the conditions I'm shooting in.

IMHO, the popularity of using a filter to 'protect' a lens is a by-product of stores up-selling them as filters have a huge profit margin.

 

[EIngerson]

I use a UV filter when I shoot motocross or am near the ocean for dust and salt protection. . I used to leave it on all the time but have learned that there is some degradation in image quality. If you're not in an environment that needs a little extra protection, I wouldn't have it on. As stated before, there are many thoughts on this and this one's just mine.