Who shoots naked?

[dearlybeloved]

I'm just wondering how many people out there dont use any protective/uv filters and just shoot with naked glass. Is there really a big difference in sharpness? why do you or do you not use uv/protective filters?

 

[cptkid]

I very very rarely shoot with a UV/protective filter.

I do sometimes shoot with a polariser, which is doing the same job, or when i'm shooting landscapes i might have my ND filters attached, but they are not screw ons.

Naked is the way to go for me. Especially when shooting a studio environment.

 

[runnah]

The good thing about shooting naked is that I don't need a tripod.

 

[DBA]

I only shoot with naked glass, I just make sure to keep a lens hood on at all times.

 

[KmH]

UV/protective filters often cause more problems than they solve, so I only rarely used them on digital cameras.

Lens hoods provide a substantial measure of impact protection, and minimize lens flare.

UV/protection filters often break/shatter in an impact and the sharp shards of glass are usually forced against and can damage/gouge/scratch the front lens element they were supposed to 'protect'.
Any filter added to the front of a lens creates a additional air gap that will promote lens flare to some degree, even if the filter is coated to minimize flare.
Many UV filters, even good ones, promote Newton's rings (Newton's rings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) and/or cause other image quality issues.

If you are shooting on a very windy day in a sandy environment, or are trackside at something like a motocross event, you might want some protection for the front lens element.
Otherwise, leave the 'protection' filter in the bag.

 

[DarkShadow]

Optically naked.I agree with everything KmH said.However,I do want a ND filter but that will be just when needed hardly ever.

 

[Mike_E]

If somebody gets me out of bed that I don't know, sure.

 

[Big Mike]

I agree with Keith. UV filters (especially cheap ones) create more problems than they solve.

I don't use a filter, specifically for protection, unless their is a very good reason for it.

 

[480sparky]

I 'go commando' 99.997265% of the time.

 

[ronlane]

I 'go commando' 99.997265% of the time.

Yikes, that image stings more than a 480 jolt does

 

[Overread]

+1 to KmH's post - for light debris and liquids its a good barrier - sand, dust, saltwater, mud - are all things a UV filter can protect against. Stones, bumps, drops, scrapes - these are all things likely to shatter the filter which will likely send sharp glass right back onto your front element and scratch it up.

Drops are best protected by having a lens hood on - whilst there are many who say that the filter took all the impact, the truth is that front element glass is typically very thick and you've got to really hit it hard to break it. UV filters though are very thin and will crack very easily.

 

[SCraig]

Why does it have to be all or nothing? They screw on the lens, they screw off the lens. Use one when and if you want to, don't use one when and if you don't want to.

 

[table1349]

I 'go commando' 99.997265% of the time.

That's funny, rumor has it you generally are using a Mankini.:shock:
http://www.onedifference.org/sites/all/files/borat-mankini-very-nice.jpg



That's just wrong ain't it?:lmao:

 

[vincentpaulrevo]

I normally shoot without a UV filter, but try to keep a lens hood on it in order to protect the lens itself. The conditions I use a UV filter is when shooting outdoors near the beach or a place where dust is found often.

I try to use a polarized near water due to the situation and environment, and while shooting a landscape I usually use some filters. The nice part of a filter is the fact that it will protect most of the equipment, I had a friend who dropped his camera face first and it shattered the entire UV filter but nothing happened to the lens.

That's totally a perk that helps, and when going after those shots that are hard to get or "reach", I'd like to have some protection. On the other hand, shooting without one is what I do commonly because in some situations I feel I don't need it.

Any type of photography while using natural light, I try to keep the UV filter off to get as much light as needed for the shot. It just really depends on the situation in my case.

 

[TCampbell]

I own the UV filters... I usually don't have them on the lens. If I were afraid of the environment and felt the need to protect the lens, I'd put it on. A "quality" filter will have a minimal effect as compared to a cheap filter. But why use a filter at all if it's not needed and not helping?