Protective filter… or not? I say beware of filter quality.

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
cplunk
Senior MemberPosts: 1,299Gear list
Like?
Re: Protective filter… or not? I say beware of filter quality.
In reply to Michel J, 8 months ago

Michel J wrote:

Allan Olesen wrote:

heliguy wrote:

I cracked 2 uv filters last year, both Times they saved the front element from damage. So I really don't care @ the iq debate......

I will ask the same question to you as I did earlier in the thread:

How do you know that the filters saved the front element?

I personnaly saved the front element, when my 28-135mm knock a marble floor, attached to my Minolta 9000.

The glass of the UV was ruptured by the violence of the shock and I only could remove it by bending the metallic ring around (after removing the broken glass). The edge of the SH was bended as well, and I had to sent it to replace the metallic front element, by the customer service, but the front lens in optical glass was totally intact. He fell more than one meter high, and if the UV filter had not absorbed the shock, it was absolutely certain that the front lens which paid for it (and it would have been good for the trash) an assumption yes, but with strong probability!

It was just my luck !

-- hide signature --

Cordialement,
Michel J
« Shoot RAW+ ...think JPEG »

Ever drop a pint glass on a tile floor and watch it bounce?  Close inspection, and you can't find a scratch.

Glass can be made to be very tough. I suspect that most of the front elements on these lenses are made that way. The filters, not so much.

 cplunk's gear list:cplunk's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Alpha DSLR-A900 Sony Alpha DSLR-A330 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony SLT-A99 +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow