Is UV necessary

for protection only or do you feel a hood is as good. How many think it best to use one and buy only top grade?
Russell

Depends on where and what you are shooting.

I use a UV because I shoot at ski areas with snow and spray in the air, on beaches (sand) and marine (yacht racing). In all cases there is a good chance there will be stuff I don't want on my lens in the air. Indoors at a basketball game? I might not be so worried about it.

If you have good glass, you should buy good filters. You spend all the money on a good optics only to put some less than good glass in front?

I buy B+W and think they are great on my L glass.

J.

rkhndjr said:

for protection only or do you feel a hood is as good. How many
think it best to use one and buy only top grade?
Russell

Click to expand...

--
'Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.' -
Mark Twain

(equip in profile)

Then you are saying that the protection is ok if obvious particles might hit the lens but go on to say that the best is the only way to go? Do you use a Pro 1 in snow storms and nothing at basketball game? Not trying to be snappy, really curious whether most feel the UV is a necessity and why.
Russell

this is one of the most hotly debated subjects on a lens forum. it's pretty much 50-50. some use just a hood fr protection

others like me always use a multi-coated UV filter and usually a hood too.

ed rader

--



'One often has mixed feelings about relatives, but few people could identify serious problems in their relationships with dogs.'

-- Anonymous

There have been tests posted here backing that, some lenses letting more light thru, and some like Kenko filters causing an actual flare problem in some instances.

But you can find some good prices online to counter the costs.
I like Heliopan [Zeiss]
Have also a few Hoyas. But don't use many of them.
I just do when having the camera use going on all day, to protect.
But mostly I like the real glass doing the picture.

Generally, I only use them on really expensive lenses, which I hate that idea the most, but really want to protect them.

I think they goof up light readings sometimes. But others love them.

--



http://netgarden.smugmug.com/
DSC V1 Sony for Infrared, Canon 20D,
a few too many lenses...

have never used UV and never will, unless I borrow a lens from someone and will be concerned for the safety of front glass.

i don't shoot in the conditions where UV light is a problem though, so it's another piece of glass sitting and blurring and glarring and vignetting me.

i do laugh at the salesmen who push these as saving grace for bad lens handling. wouldn't want one for free.
but that's just me - i can be wrong.

--
a.

aIexander said:

i don't shoot in the conditions where UV light is a problem though,
so it's another piece of glass sitting and blurring and glarring
and vignetting me.

Click to expand...

I don't really think UV is an issue with digital anyway... Most people probably just use it for "protection" (I do too; I just enclosed that in quotes because it seems that this idea is controversial as well)
--
Forza Ferrari

The thread stopper

It's debatable how much UV is actually blocked by the UV filter. After all, the glass in the lens itself probably blocks most UV. I've never been able to detect any difference when I ran tests at high elevation (where UV is less likely to be blocked by the atmosphere). The real purpose of the UV filter is to protect the lens. The filter will keep your fingerprints off the front element of the lens which is the worst hazard a lens will ever face except for dropping it. If you shoot around salt spray, then a filter is also called for. Normal amounts of dust aren't really an issue since it's easy to clean off and it takes a huge built up of dust before light diffraction around the dust particals causes detectable contrast reduction in the image. A lens hood can also keep fingerprints off the lens but it's not as fool proof as a filter. A lens hood also prevents flare, either from the lens elements or the filter. I use both a filter and a lens hood all the time.

According to an article in a 2003 issue of Popular Photography magazine, their tests showed no difference in quality amongst name brand filters nor could they detect any difference between multi-coated and single-coated filters. (Cheap off-brand polarizing filters were the exception and could add a color cast to the image.) So, buy the cheapest name-brand UV filter you can find.
--
http://www.fantasy-photo.com

I don't like them at all. Anything but the best ones degrade the image quality. Even the best ones do a little in the right circumstances. The only lens I am contemplating putting one on is my 17-40 since it would complete its sealing. OF course, on film they serve a purpose since film is responsive to UV.
--
http://davidson.smugmug.com
Use this code to save $5 on smugmug: UPu6udxnAfhNI
See my profile for equipment and wish list

As someone who has used Canon brand (the junkiest) Hoya green label (still pretty junky but better) Hoya HMC (pretty good) and B+W f-pro (which I hold is the best, though I never tried S-HMC) I can tell you there are very noticeably differences between filters, and also mutlicoating matters...it matters a lot.
Richard
--
http://davidson.smugmug.com
Use this code to save $5 on smugmug: UPu6udxnAfhNI
See my profile for equipment and wish list

I hold that the Canon filters are the same thing as the standard Hoyas. In addition I've come to believe that Quantaray filters are also made by Hoya. Can anyone verify this?
--
Forza Ferrari

The thread stopper

It's multicoated on both sides & is 3mm with thread.

The coatings are designed to help reduce flare & ghosting which is more prone to effect digital cameras thus the "D".

--
Sure I've got a photography memory...... just needs developing!

Any lens is only as good as its glass elements. it is the glass that gathers the light and transmits that to the recording medium, senor or film.

Knowing this, than obviously, if you are going to use a UV filter, it would make sense to use a filter that is commensurate with the quality of your lens.The better the lens, the more important the quality of its UV filter.

Should one even use a UV Filter?

Depends on the person & the conditions in which they shoot.

Studio work, indoors, climate controlled -- a shooter who is careful, respectful and babies his equipment would probably not need a UV filter. his front element is never going to get dirty, dusty, scratched or abused in anyway.

Normal shooter, outside, wind, dust, around crowds of people, carrying his camera from a strap around his neck --- he should most likely use a filter, for nothing, as an added protection for his front element.

Better to put all one cleaning marks, and you will marks when you clean glass, eventually over time, than to put those marks ON a the front element of your lens itself.

If a filter gets scratched, nicked or develops faint cleaning marks,, you can easily and cheaply replace it.

if a front lens element develops such things, you need to send the lens and hope the technician who works on your lens is careful and craftsman who take pride in both his work , as well as his work environment.

I have sent a lens back four separate times due to a factory repair center not getting it clean enough, when I sent it in for repair. In each instance, an inner lens element had some spec of dust on it.

I come down on the side of caution and use a UV filter, B+W to be specific, on all my glass. Even the lesser expensive ones that I give to my daughter.

Then again, when I sold off my Minolta gear, to switch to canon, my USED Minolta gear brought higher than new price, on eBAY, due to my reputation among other Minoltans.

So, for me, UV filters were a good investment.

--
Dave Patterson
---------------------
Midwestshutterbug.com

What I am saying is that I use them because I shoot where there is stuff in the air that I don't want on my lens. For example, I don't want small sand particles hitting my lens or anywhere near them because when I clean the lens, if I did not get them off, there is a possibility that I could scratch the coating. The same is true if salt spray dries on the lens leaving a salt crystal.

Skiing, I use one not for snowstorms but because it is usually windy and there is stuff blowing around - snow etc... I will also often not put the lens cap on moving between shots since it is a pain with gloves on.

If I were inside, I would anticipate no such problems so I might not use them. I also will remove them if there is a very strong side light.

If I DO use a filter, I'm going to use the best I can because I am typically shooting with good glass. An optically inferior piece in front of the lens will degrade the image (why have the high quality lens if you are pointing it through a lower quality piece). I also have only multicoated filters since they have less reflections between the filter and the lens.

Another side benefit of filters, they are easier to clean than the lens in some cases. You don't have to be worried getting the cleaning fluid in the lens so you can be more generous with it plus it is flat. A small thing.

I always try and use a hood - regardless of using a filter. It improves the contrast.

So, bottom line - I have one on my lenses almost all the time. But it isn't a hard and fast requirement and it mostly has to do with the environment I'm shooting in.

J.

rkhndjr said:

Then you are saying that the protection is ok if obvious particles
might hit the lens but go on to say that the best is the only way
to go? Do you use a Pro 1 in snow storms and nothing at basketball
game? Not trying to be snappy, really curious whether most feel the
UV is a necessity and why.
Russell

Click to expand...

--
'Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.' -
Mark Twain

(equip in profile)

It's known who makes the Canon filters, but I forget who it is. I can tell you from my testing that they're actually worse than the standard Hoya. They aren't like Nikon where the filters are actually decent.
--
http://davidson.smugmug.com
Use this code to save $5 on smugmug: UPu6udxnAfhNI
See my profile for equipment and wish list