Filters / Lens Hood / Nude

[Alpha_7]

It's the age old debate that has almost been done to death, but here is my variation.

I started with kit lens and 70-300G, and not trusting myself got Hoya UV filters for the both. While I can say they have saved the life of my lens, they have done a good job preventing little kiddie fingers from greasing up the lens, and it does give me a sense of 'protection' when wandering round the bush, rocks and other treacherous areas. As an aside I don't use the lens hoods on either of these all that much, infact for the kit lens it often really annoys me.

Move on to December and I get the lovely 80-200 2.8, it doesn't have a lens hood, and so far has no filter, but it does protect the lens fairly well, a product of its design.

I'm now in a state (I use the word limbo) with a Sigma 10-20, I'd like to finally get a CPL, a 77mm and I'll use it on all my lens with some set up rings.
The decision now is should I get a UV filter for the Sigma I was going to get the extra thin one to reduce vignetting, and if I'm getting filters should I spring for a 72mm UV for the 80-200 or not.

[Raskill]

I'd get one. And for that lens, it needed be the super special thin ones either. I got one for the 70-200VR just for protection, rather a cracked filter at a rally than a useless lens. You'd never forgive yourself following your post and this thread if you damaged your lens....

[avkomp]

I believe that lens hoods and filters can protect the front element from damage and always use at least a lens hood and usually both. quite apart from the advantages that they were designed for in the first place!

A few months ago I was using my 80-400vr in scrub with lens hood and no filter, now it has a ding on the front element and I dont know what happened. stick perhaps?? I am quite often going where myself and the camera is placed in harms way.

I was going to get a filter for the 80-400 but hadnt got around to it, now it will carry the scars for all time.

Steve

[Alpha_7]

Steve, I'm a bit like you. I often find I've put the camera in harms way and haven't even realised it. So I think its a wise investment to have the filter and try to use the hood more often. Your story confirms what I was thinking better to be safe then sorry, and if I really want a super pic I can take the filter off, take the shot and then wack it back on again.

Raskill - I was actually thinking (kind of been cancelled for me now) of doing some Rally Photography so I think it would be a good idea.. I guess its also would also offer a little protection from dust (at least on the front element, not elsewhere).

[Paul]

Craig,
I always use a UV filter on all my lens plus I use the hood just in case of light flare or an accidental bumb.
Peace of mind comes easy when you follow this principle.

[Greg B]

The first thing I do with a new lens is put a UV filter on it.

There was a lengthy discussion about this way back, and I recall that Birdy felt that there would be some degree of image degradation because of the filter. I have no doubt he is right, but I guess it is a matter of cost/benefit.

Presumably a good quality filter will reduce the degradation. Whereas a fingerprint on a lens has the potential to do permanent damage if the coating is compromised, or the removal process is too vigorous or includes a largish speck of dust.

A scratch on the front element won't be too good either.

We make choices - I choose safety.

[birddog114]

Yes, UV filter on the lens may degrade or creating flare, good ideas for lens protection and take it off when you shoot, that's my way!

[daniel_r]

Craig,

This article has a good section on filter flare (near the bottom) and a diagram of what is happening (introducing a flat surface - ie the filter). It's explained further here with an example of no filter, good quality multi-coat, and a no-name no-coat.

The thing is filter flare is likely to happen when you would normally encounter lens flare under normal bright conditions, while increasing the possibility in the cases shown in the article.

I haven't personally encountered filter flare as described by the article in my night shots. I try to avoid taking the UV off when shooting at night as that when I'm more prone to damaging and loosing stuff

These examples were shot using the kit lens with a multi-coat UV on.
example 1
example 2

and in this case it's mostly aperture ghosting lens flare, with the soft starbust look due to the UV filter:
example 3