DSLRUsers.com

Hi.

I'm planning to get a Hoya HD filter for my Canon 24-105mm lens (ie. 77mm). Can someone please advise whether to get a UV or a Clear Protector?

Cheers.

This debate is usually fought with religious fervour, but we didn't have it in a while and it's Christmas, so why not…

UV filters are fine if you want to filter out UV light. Clear protectors are there to protect their maker's bottom line. For general photography it doesn't matter which one you get, as long as you keep it off your lens

EDIT: Forgot to add, always use a lens hood (the right way around).

Cheers
Steffen.

There's two schools of thought on this debate. You have to be honest with yourself though.

1. If you are a fastidiously careful person (like me) then you will always be spatially aware of where the end of your lens is and you take extra care when handling your camera and when taking a shot. If this is the case you don't need a filter to 'protect' your investment, after all, they do reduce the quality of your images unless you add them to enhance them. That's what filters are for. (eg; Polariser, star filter, neutral density etc.) Most, but not all, filter effects can be added later in photoshop where you have much greater control over the effect.

2. If you have two left thumbs, have really big hands or are not very strong and have a heavy camera, if you find that you trip over things or are generally rough with your equipment or like to take photos in dust storms then the UV filter will help protect your investment. Remember to remove it if you are taking long-exposure images with bright lights in them otherwise you get annoying 'filter effects' such as multiple rays of light emanating from street lights.

There may be a grey area in between these two.

As Steffen said, a lens hood will probably afford more protection in the case of an accidental drop. Many an expensive camera has been saved by that sole veritable piece of plastic.

If you do decide to choose the filter option, make sure you get the best you can afford. Use the search tab above to seek out the many different threads concerning filter that this site has had over many years. There's been plenty of discussion and lot's of really useful advice.

I used to religiously believe in filters for lens protection. But lately I have been noticing the (sometimes) subtle improvement with not having them, and in hindsight, in twenty odd years of SLR ownership (I know, a late starter) the only time one of these filters has ever been damaged and supposedly protected my lens was when the guy servicing my camera dropped something onto the lens and broke the filter. I now no longer use that service centre or filters purely for protection much to the annoyance of the girl at Ted's the other night who couldn't sell me a filter and treated me like I was stupid because I didnt like them.

Ant.

The only thing that's good about a filter is when you are cleaning. If you scratch it, then it can be replaced. Recently I was wiping sea salt off my 10-22 front element using my tshirt.....

The filter thread is my favourite to keep an eye on...will follow with interest.

A UV filter will reduce the effect of atmospheric, or aerial, perspective. This is a smoky or misty appearance of objects in the far distance. If you want to reduce this element in your image then use a UV filter. If you want to capture the fading, smoky background then take your UV filter off. If you want to protect your lens then the use of a UV or skylight filter is recommended but there will be a change in the appearance of your image and a very slight reduction in the quality of your image...usually a slight drop in contrast.

I think you've all missed the point of the OP. He is comparing UV Vs Clear. Not Filter Vs none.

Matt comes the closest.
UV filters out UV, hence the name. It is traditionally used to filter out haze at high altitude as this is caused by UV radiation (greater at altitude) fogging the FILM. Not sure of their effect on Digital sensors as I don't know their UV sensitivity. At low altitude, they are effectively the same as a clear "filter", so traditionally they were just left on the lens to protect it.

Clear filters (should!) have no effect on the light passing through it.

So to summarise, at low altitude (from memory <1000m, but its an old memory) both are effectively the same. At higher altitudes, UV filters will cut haze on FILM cameras while Clear will have no effect.

However, all pieces of glass are sources of reflections. By adding a filter, you are adding two extra reflection surfaces. This will reduce contrast, and possibly add flare. If you use any filter (I belong to the No filter except for a specific effect school), it should be multi-coated to reduce these unwanted reflections.

Thanks for all your reply. I have decided to go ahead with a HOYA PRO1 D Digital 77mm UV(0) Filter DMC. Hope this will do the job!

tkle18 wrote:Hope this will do the job!

What is the job you are hoping it will do?

ATJ wrote:

tkle18 wrote:Hope this will do the job!

What is the job you are hoping it will do?

The bathroom needs cleaning.