Filter for protection…?

I have a “carry-everywhere” m200 that I’ve been using a lot lately with the 22 & 32mm lenses. Should I be using protective UV filters, or skip them? If yes, which brands are decent that won’t degrade image quality, and that won’t break the bank?

Thanks!

nnowak wrote:

BrianOdell wrote:

I have a “carry-everywhere” m200 that I’ve been using a lot lately with the 22 & 32mm lenses. Should I be using protective UV filters, or skip them? If yes, which brands are decent that won’t degrade image quality, and that won’t break the bank?

Thanks!

Skip them. They will do nothing to improve your photos, but even the best have the potential to degrade you photos. If you want to protect you lenses, and also improve the image quality, always use a hood on your lenses.

The only times you would want to use a protective filter is in extreme situations like the Sahara during a sandstorm or macro photos of a welding arc. For typical day to day bumps and dings, they are pointless.

I agree with this, although from time to time you still see posts and videos urging you to always use a filter. Perhaps from YouTubers who get paid to refer people to equipment purchasing links! I find that even the best filters add a little flare and unwanted reflections when night shooting.

I use step-up rings on most lenses that are smaller than 55mm filter size, which also helps provide some protection from lens-front 'dings' and stray fingers hitting the front element.  I do this partly so that I can use 55mm filters on the lenses with less hassle. The lenses I've stepped up are the Canon EF-M 22, 32, 15-45, and 18-55. I don't use one on the EF-M 55-200 because the lens hood won't come on or off with a step-up ring on it.

For the EF-M 18-150mm, which already has a 55mm filter size, I add an 'empty' 55mm filter from which the glass has been removed ---- the glass on this lens is very close to the front, quite exposed --- I find I hit it with my fingers and the lens cap too often and this extra protection really helps. The lens hood still fits fine on it with a 55mm filter.

BrianOdell wrote:

I have a “carry-everywhere” m200 that I’ve been using a lot lately with the 22 & 32mm lenses. Should I be using protective UV filters, or skip them? If yes, which brands are decent that won’t degrade image quality, and that won’t break the bank?

Thanks!

Super cheap filters are typically "get what you pay for" disappointments. Lensrentals did testing of UV filters awhile back and found a somewhat pricey Hoya model to be best-in-class, truly excellent. (Hoya UV filters are available in cheap, medium and pricey models, so if you're a purist search for Lensrentals and UV filter test to learn which one scored so well.)

I've found mid-priced Waka and K&F UV filters to be well made, multicoated and very good at cutting through haze, rendering skies with some clouds nicely and not degrading images. I have a couple of Hoya and Amazon Basic filters that are decent, as well. Protection-wise, use of a lens hood is an excellent idea. Having a filter in front of the lens provides some additional protection.

If you really, really want the ne plus ultra of image quality, get yourself a top-rated medium-format camera with a collection of lenses whose total price outweighs the annual budget of a few third-world countries, and go for it. Anything less is just fooling around, OK?

If you plan on having many of your images made into highest-quality, giant-sized prints, no sense compromising IQ with with a UV filter -- or for that matter shooting with a dinky APS-C camera. The way to uncompromising IQ perfection is clear. If your photographic aspirations are more down to Earth, use of a decent-grade UV filter is unlikely to cause you or others to turn away from your images in disgust over how icky they look. At least, that's been my experience.

BrianOdell wrote:

I have a “carry-everywhere” m200 that I’ve been using a lot lately with the 22 & 32mm lenses. Should I be using protective UV filters, or skip them? If yes, which brands are decent that won’t degrade image quality, and that won’t break the bank?

Thanks!

Welcome to the Forum!

Filters are like any other accessory. Use them when the situation calls for it.

If you believe there is risk, put a (high quality) protective filter on. For some people, yes this could mean 100% of the time.  That’s OK.

For me, this is a rarity (only when blowing spray/sand could be an issue). Then I use the highest quality filters I can find (I prefer the B+W MRC varieties), because as mentioned using even the best filters can have an effect on IQ (and using lesser filters can even affect autofocus ie. with telephotos).

Polarizers, ND filters, and special effects filters can be used as needed of course (I also recommend high quality filters here too). And lens hoods are good 100% of the time.

This practice has served me well for quite a few decades now. Knock on wood!

Happy shooting!

R2

BrianOdell wrote:

I have a “carry-everywhere” m200 that I’ve been using a lot lately with the 22 & 32mm lenses. Should I be using protective UV filters, or skip them? If yes, which brands are decent that won’t degrade image quality, and that won’t break the bank?

Thanks!

This is an age old difficult question a lot like "Which is the best for computing,  Windows or Apple". People have strong opinions on the topic, some based on experience but a lot are based on what well known photographers have told them or written about.

A few things you might consider are do you go out in dusty conditions? Do you keep your camera and lenses in a bag with dividers so they aren't knocking around and carefully put the lens caps on each time you store them? Do you think you might ever sell your lenses and buy different ones at some point?

I shot professionally from 1976 to 2010 when I retired and I had filters on my cameras almost all the time. Quite often a UV filter but also warming filters, soft focus, Kodak Wratten filters, etc. When I was out shooting an annual report and chasing the light I was lucky to get a rear cap on a lens when I switched out but hardly ever a front cap, I tossed the lens into the bag and moved on to the next shot before the light changed.

Now I am retired but still shoot a lot for myself and I own at last count 24 lenses for 4 different camera systems. Every one of my lenses has a protective filter on it. I sometimes try out a lens and then might sell it if I feel it's not what I want. Small marks on the lens barrel are not a big deal but a scratch on an element makes it worth a lot less. In all my years of shooting I have never had a filter lower the quality of an image but then again I buy the best filters I can afford. B&W, Charo and ones made by Breakthrough Photography. B&H sells these in many sizes or check Amazon. I get the higher end models made of brass instead of aluminum and with Schott glass and a 99% transmission value.

You get what you pay for, good filters don't degrade images but cheap ones could. Also try not to stack filters, you remove the UV when putting on a polarizer. And remove the filter if shooting into the sun or bright lights is generally considered the best thing.

Ultimately only you can decide. For me a $2500 lens is going to have a $100 filter on it. It's like insurance. And you have to wonder if Canon, Nikon, Hasselblad and others would be selling and recommending filters for their lenses if they caused problems.