Nikon 200-500....filter or not?

[CMCM]

Do you put a protective/UV filter on the 200-500? I know there's a lot of discussion on whether or not to use filters, but this is an expensive lens. I rented one recently and of course they had a UV filter on bit, but if I get the lens, I'm wondering about whether or not I should also get a filter.

 

[sinkas]

Not. I wouldn't bother. The lens hood extends far beyond the front element. It may possibly affect image quality.

 

[historianx]

If you feel better putting one one, then go for it. I have a B&W UV filter on mine, but I'm old school. Any alleged image degredation is minuscule at worst, esp if you go for quality like B&W or Hoya. I also use a 95mm polarizer on the 200-500, and my only real complaint is man are they expensive! But I have a Zeiss wide angle that takes 95mm so it all works out

 

[arniebook]

I have had filters on all of my lenses since my second camera in 1964.

Two reasons. First to protect the expensive front element. Even just a light bump on the wrong object could cause significant damage to the glass and/or the coatings. You'll likely ruin the filter in such an incident, but the front element will be spared.

Second, I want to never have to clean lens elements. Never ... I always worried I would scratch the coatings or make a smeary mess. I once ruined a good Hoya polarizer by not knowing how to clean it. If something needs cleaning, it will be the filter, not the front element. And if you screw it up, it is easy to replace.

So for me, brand new lenses get a filter screwed on right out of the box.

Always, for sure, use good filters ... most of mine are B+W. This one is on my 200-500 ... B+W 95mm Clear UV Haze with Multi-Resistant Coating ... $90 US from B&H or Amazon. The modern multilayer coatings on state of the art filters are designed to help keep them clean, reducing the need for us to clean them, as well as reduce reflections.

I don't think I have ever noticed any kind of adverse effect from the filters I use. And heck, I sometimes shoot birds at a feeder through my double pane kitchen windows and still get great detail with that lens.

They are after all, made of optical quality glass ... you know ... the stuff the 19 lens elements in the 200-500 are made of.

I'm sure some will disagree, but I recommend using filters.

Arnie

 

[Krish6102]

Do you put a protective/UV filter on the 200-500? I know there's a lot of discussion on whether or not to use filters, but this is an expensive lens. I rented one recently and of course they had a UV filter on bit, but if I get the lens, I'm wondering about whether or not I should also get a filter.

Check out this thread:-

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4307927

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

Most advanced photographers seem not to use filters, other than for special effects, in normal shooting conditions.

Whether you buy an expensive 95mm filter is a decision for you..

I am considering a 95mm pol for my 200/500 and 500 PF.

 

[CMCM]

Most advanced photographers seem not to use filters, other than for special effects, in normal shooting conditions.

Whether you buy an expensive 95mm filter is a decision for you..

I am considering a 95mm pol for my 200/500 and 500 PF.

That one could be useful here and there.

 

[historianx]

Most advanced photographers seem not to use filters, other than for special effects, in normal shooting conditions.

Count me in as an "advanced" photographer that does. About the only time I don't is in the studio with my weird lighting setups, to avoid rogue flare. But when I'm out and about thrashing in the woods and wetlands, filters go on and stay on. After all, a hood can't protect the front element when it hits a tree branch (yes that's happened).

Whether you buy an expensive 95mm filter is a decision for you..

I am considering a 95mm pol for my 200/500 and 500 PF.

Good thing about this is that you don't need a super-thin CPL (like you would with a UWA), which drives up the cost.

 

[scokill]

Lens rentals tested a lot of filters to answer your question. Basic conclusions below. From their testing...yes it impacts IQ to varying degrees and brand/cost isn't a big factor in whether a filter impacts IQ and to what degree.

This is subjective data, of course, and I gave you full-size images so you can make your personal opinion. But Aaron and I spend all day adjusting lenses by evaluating changes in these kinds of dots. We looked at them separately, and both had exactly the same subjective conclusions:

Filters that had no significant effect: All B&W, Canon Protect, Chiaro 98 UVAT, Heliopan Protection, Heliopan UV SH-PMC, Hoya HD Protector, Hoya HMC UV, MeFoto Lens Karma, Nikon Neutral, Tiffen Ultra Clear, Tiffen HC, Zeiss T* UV

Filter may have had an adverse effect: Hoya NXT HMC UV, Tiffen Clear;

Filter had a significant adverse effect: Chiaro 90 UVAT, Chiaro 99 UVBTS

Google lensrentals.com and filters and there are several articles.

 

[fishy wishy]

I have a filter on for traveling because I've had lens caps come off in transit and you don't want a friction rub on the front element. If I get to a location where I'm using the lens for a long amount of time, the filter will usually come off. If it's a case of keep taking the lens out of the bag, the filter will probably stay on for protection.

 

[Ernie Misner]

I have had filters on all of my lenses since my second camera in 1964.

Two reasons. First to protect the expensive front element. Even just a light bump on the wrong object could cause significant damage to the glass and/or the coatings. You'll likely ruin the filter in such an incident, but the front element will be spared.

Second, I want to never have to clean lens elements. Never ... I always worried I would scratch the coatings or make a smeary mess. I once ruined a good Hoya polarizer by not knowing how to clean it. If something needs cleaning, it will be the filter, not the front element. And if you screw it up, it is easy to replace.

So for me, brand new lenses get a filter screwed on right out of the box.

Always, for sure, use good filters ... most of mine are B+W. This one is on my 200-500 ... B+W 95mm Clear UV Haze with Multi-Resistant Coating ... $90 US from B&H or Amazon. The modern multilayer coatings on state of the art filters are designed to help keep them clean, reducing the need for us to clean them, as well as reduce reflections.

I don't think I have ever noticed any kind of adverse effect from the filters I use. And heck, I sometimes shoot birds at a feeder through my double pane kitchen windows and still get great detail with that lens.

They are after all, made of optical quality glass ... you know ... the stuff the 19 lens elements in the 200-500 are made of.

I'm sure some will disagree, but I recommend using filters.

Arnie

Do you use a PL or ND filter often? If so it seems like a lot of time would be spent removing and replacing the protective filter unless you want to stack them.

 

[arniebook]

I have had filters on all of my lenses since my second camera in 1964.

Two reasons. First to protect the expensive front element. Even just a light bump on the wrong object could cause significant damage to the glass and/or the coatings. You'll likely ruin the filter in such an incident, but the front element will be spared.

Second, I want to never have to clean lens elements. Never ... I always worried I would scratch the coatings or make a smeary mess. I once ruined a good Hoya polarizer by not knowing how to clean it. If something needs cleaning, it will be the filter, not the front element. And if you screw it up, it is easy to replace.

So for me, brand new lenses get a filter screwed on right out of the box.

Always, for sure, use good filters ... most of mine are B+W. This one is on my 200-500 ... B+W 95mm Clear UV Haze with Multi-Resistant Coating ... $90 US from B&H or Amazon. The modern multilayer coatings on state of the art filters are designed to help keep them clean, reducing the need for us to clean them, as well as reduce reflections.

I don't think I have ever noticed any kind of adverse effect from the filters I use. And heck, I sometimes shoot birds at a feeder through my double pane kitchen windows and still get great detail with that lens.

They are after all, made of optical quality glass ... you know ... the stuff the 19 lens elements in the 200-500 are made of.

I'm sure some will disagree, but I recommend using filters.

Arnie

Do you use a PL or ND filter often? If so it seems like a lot of time would be spent removing and replacing the protective filter unless you want to stack them.

No, not often, and I don't stack them. That's not a reason for me to not use filters anyway. Just me. Seems your mileage is a bit different, and that is perfectly okay!

Arnie

 

[LordKOTL]

Do you put a protective/UV filter on the 200-500? I know there's a lot of discussion on whether or not to use filters, but this is an expensive lens. I rented one recently and of course they had a UV filter on bit, but if I get the lens, I'm wondering about whether or not I should also get a filter.

Personally, the only filter I've ever used on it was a solar filter.

Other than that? Just the hood. YMMV.

 

[historianx]

Lens rentals tested a lot of filters to answer your question. Basic conclusions below. From their testing...yes it impacts IQ to varying degrees and brand/cost isn't a big factor in whether a filter impacts IQ and to what degree.

This is subjective data, of course, and I gave you full-size images so you can make your personal opinion. But Aaron and I spend all day adjusting lenses by evaluating changes in these kinds of dots. We looked at them separately, and both had exactly the same subjective conclusions:

Filters that had no significant effect: All B&W, Canon Protect, Chiaro 98 UVAT, Heliopan Protection, Heliopan UV SH-PMC, Hoya HD Protector, Hoya HMC UV, MeFoto Lens Karma, Nikon Neutral, Tiffen Ultra Clear, Tiffen HC, Zeiss T* UV

Filter may have had an adverse effect: Hoya NXT HMC UV, Tiffen Clear;

Filter had a significant adverse effect: Chiaro 90 UVAT, Chiaro 99 UVBTS

Google lensrentals.com and filters and there are several articles.

Interesting conclusions, thanks!

 

[calson]

I use a UV protective filter when out where there will be wind blown water or dirt or sand. The rest of the time I rely on the lens hood to protect the front element.

 

[Snapshott]

If it eases your mind get a good filter and put it on so you won't be distracted while shooting. For me I put them on when shooting in harsh or wet environments and don't use them when not. If I forget and leave one on, no problem.

 

[MrHollywood]

Do you put a protective/UV filter on the 200-500? I know there's a lot of discussion on whether or not to use filters, but this is an expensive lens. I rented one recently and of course they had a UV filter on bit, but if I get the lens, I'm wondering about whether or not I should also get a filter.

I put a good B&W filter on mine.

Zero effect on IQ.

Rob

 

[CMCM]

Do you put a protective/UV filter on the 200-500? I know there's a lot of discussion on whether or not to use filters, but this is an expensive lens. I rented one recently and of course they had a UV filter on bit, but if I get the lens, I'm wondering about whether or not I should also get a filter.

I put a good B&W filter on mine.

Zero effect on IQ.

Rob

I've got B+W on all my lenses, even did some comparisons with and without a filter, and I couldn't detect any IQ difference.