Reading mode: Light Dark

Best UV filters with no image degradation?

Go to last post
EvilKarma

EvilKarma

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
386
Reaction score
52
Location
Toronto, CA
I don't really like filters and am one of those people who are always careful with his gear. I do however have a B+W XS PRO MRC NANO filter on one of my lenses, though mainly because cleaning the filter is a lot easier than the front element and I'm paranoid of rubbing the coating off it. I just recently bought a 135mm f2 lens with a huge front element (77mm thread) and it's just so big that I do feel like I should get a filter to protect it. I looked at the same B+W filter for the 77mm thread and it's like $90 which I am not willing to pay for =/ any cheaper alternatives with minimal image degradation?
 
I would put no less than a high quality BW filter on any of my lenses. Even better - I would put no filter at all! :-)

I used to have filters on my most valuable lenses but not anymore. I do not want to ignite the filter debate again. About the 135L - it can really use a hood - you can easily get flare from off-axis light, I have observed that. With a hood, a filter is not needed for protection.
 
EvilKarma said:
I don't really like filters and am one of those people who are always careful with his gear. I do however have a B+W XS PRO MRC NANO filter on one of my lenses, though mainly because cleaning the filter is a lot easier than the front element and I'm paranoid of rubbing the coating off it. I just recently bought a 135mm f2 lens with a huge front element (77mm thread) and it's just so big that I do feel like I should get a filter to protect it. I looked at the same B+W filter for the 77mm thread and it's like $90 which I am not willing to pay for =/ any cheaper alternatives with minimal image degradation?

--
Click to expand...
Yes - the lens hood. Luckily Canon includes them with all of their L lenses, and the 135 f/2 comes with a nice, big one :-)
 
How do you know he is referring to a Canon lens? It could be the new Samyang or the Zeiss 135/2.
 
Just buy any 77mm UV filter you can find on ebay. Try it. I bet you wont see any degradation in your images.
 
COYQ said:
Just buy any 77mm UV filter you can find on ebay. Try it. I bet you wont see any degradation in your images.
Click to expand...
Yes. I once took a shot through a window pane and it looked fine ;-)

But one should remove any cheap filter when there is a potential flare issue. (street lights etc)
The cheapo filter I use gets washed in liquid dish detergent when the grand kids' greasy fingers leave a finger print.
Lens hoods are fine on prime lenses but on 13:1 zooms, pretty much useless (as a flare reducer)

Bert
 
BertIverson said:
COYQ said:
Just buy any 77mm UV filter you can find on ebay. Try it. I bet you wont see any degradation in your images.
Click to expand...
Yes. I once took a shot through a window pane and it looked fine ;-)
But one should remove any cheap filter when there is a potential flare issue. (street lights etc)
The cheapo filter I use gets washed in liquid dish detergent when the grand kids' greasy fingers leave a finger print.
Lens hoods are fine on prime lenses but on 13:1 zooms, pretty much useless (as a flare reducer)
Bert
Click to expand...
You can get telescoping hoods which can adapt to the range of view angles of a superzoom.
 
COYQ said:
Just buy any 77mm UV filter you can find on ebay. Try it. I bet you wont see any degradation in your images.
Click to expand...
I bet he will. Unless it happens to be a genuine Hoya, B+W, Marumi etc.
 
I like the ones with a visible colour coating that mutes reflections, like Camdiox 1D. At the price it's not going to hurt to try it.
 
I use uv filter to protect my lens for indoor shot or trivial use for 90% of the time.

When i look for best result i simply take it off.the last 10% of the time.
--
stop shopping for lenses and start taking photo!

If you have to ask, you likely don't know what focal lengths you are interested in. In my opinion, get the kit lens
 
For decades I had a B+W UV filter on every lens for protection. Shooting weddings your gear can get bumped into etc.

It got me in the habit and a few years ago I switched to Hoya Pro Digital One filters on all lenses.

People love to argue about "needing" them Yeah they don't help if you drop you camera but I've never dropped a camera and its not why I use them. I use them for simple protection against getting scratched.

Any filter that I use is always multi-coated.

Steve

--
www.StevenJamesPhotography.com
 
Last edited:
stevenjames said:
For decades I had a B+W UV filter on every lens for protection. Shooting weddings your gear can get bumped into etc.

It got me in the habit and a few years ago I switched to Hoya Pro Digital One filters on all lenses.

People love to argue about "needing" them Yeah they don't help if you drop you camera but I've never dropped a camera and its not why I use them. I use them for simple protection against getting scratched.

Any filter that I use is always multi-coated.

Steve
Click to expand...
 
J A C S said:
I would put no less than a high quality BW filter on any of my lenses. Even better - I would put no filter at all! :-)

I used to have filters on my most valuable lenses but not anymore. I do not want to ignite the filter debate again. About the 135L - it can really use a hood - you can easily get flare from off-axis light, I have observed that. With a hood, a filter is not needed for protection.

--
Formerly known as Just Another Canon Shooter
Click to expand...
.

And, of course, the best way to not "ignite" a filter debate is to avoid making silly, over-generalizations like, "With a hood, a filter is not needed for protection."

Unless it's raining. Or snowing. Or mist is blowing over a ridge or open water. Or unless one is near waves splashing at the shore. Or if one is walking through scrubby shrub areas where an errant branch might scratch the front element. Or unless it's windy in a dusty or sandy environment.

But other that that, no, there's never any need for a filter.

.
 
Last edited:
LifeIsAVerb said:
J A C S said:
I would put no less than a high quality BW filter on any of my lenses. Even better - I would put no filter at all! :-)

I used to have filters on my most valuable lenses but not anymore. I do not want to ignite the filter debate again. About the 135L - it can really use a hood - you can easily get flare from off-axis light, I have observed that. With a hood, a filter is not needed for protection.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
LifeIsAVerb said:
J A C S said:
I would put no less than a high quality BW filter on any of my lenses. Even better - I would put no filter at all! :-)

I used to have filters on my most valuable lenses but not anymore. I do not want to ignite the filter debate again. About the 135L - it can really use a hood - you can easily get flare from off-axis light, I have observed that. With a hood, a filter is not needed for protection.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top