uv filter on? off?

System · February 15, 2006

I keep a uv filter on my lenses-

if, for instance, I have the camera set up on a tripod for a portrait, I'll take the filter off, but taking candids of my grandson today, I left it on--

what's recommended?-

thanks
george

DanielB · February 15, 2006

ohhh, i read an article about this very debate awhile back.... wish i could find it.:uhoh

anyways, after reading it i came to the realization that UV filters degrade the Image quality, and yes, they're good in some instances for weather sealing *like the 17-40* but today's front elements are strong enough glass that a few specs of dust, or wiping it with your shirt tail/tie isn't going to scratch up the glass... as a matter of fact i keep Lense cleaners for my glasses on-hand just in case...

but yeah, if i can find that article i'll link it.

System · February 15, 2006

DanielB-

thanks much-
I'll be looking for it-

george

MrBook2 · February 15, 2006

DanielB wrote:

ohhh, i read an article about this very debate awhile back.... wish i could find it.:uhoh
.....
but yeah, if i can find that article i'll link it.

I don't know if this is the one you were thinking of, but have a look:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml

--Aaron

System · February 15, 2006

danielb and aaron-

that's great!

thanks much!

george

DanielB · February 15, 2006

MrBook2 wrote:

I don't know if this is the one you were thinking of, but have a look:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml

--Aaron

thats the one.

Art Scott · February 15, 2006

fIlter off unless needed......if your lens is 20 yrs old or so I might suggest a skylight but even back then I found that screw on filters were a prob, cause crap still got under them and where the H*** did I put that filter wrench....oh yeah it is back in the desk drawer.......

Shay Stephens · February 15, 2006

UV filters were useful for film as film is sensitive to UV. However, digital is very insensitive to UV and no filtering is needed.

I don't have one and I don't use one. I only use filters if they have an effect I want to use. When done, I remove the filter.

System · February 16, 2006

thanks all-

george

Andy · February 16, 2006

Use a filter when you NEED it. UV for lens protection is so yesterday. Use a lens hood, and BE CAREFUL.

Yes, of course, put a UV or Sky1A on when you're at the beach or somesuch place. But for normal shooting, it's more an annoyance/hindrance than a benefit.

My .02

ginger_55 · February 16, 2006

Don't tell anyone, but I use UV filters for protection, then again, I am a klutz and so "yesterday" myself.

ginger (who can never keep track of the lens caps) I didn't have it on my 400 for about 6 months, nothing bad happened, but my UV filter on my 17-40 was all scratched up. One scratch was so bad I don't know if I could have sold it. I think one needs to know oneself, also that lens was always being banged on. The 400 has that attached hood thing. It did not seem to attract the banging that the wide did.

As an old lady, I do things. (Maybe I should put a UV filter on my face for protection from falls and on my feet so I don't have to replace tennis shoes from pluff mud suction.)

System · February 17, 2006

andy and ginger-

thanks much

ginger-

although I don't consider myself old (I'm sure anyone under their 50's would roll their eyes at that), I do consider myself crazier than hell at times, so your comments are something to think about-

george

GraphyFotoz · February 17, 2006

Well........
I would tend to agree that a UV degrades the image.
BUT I noticed that the newer HMC's....PRO-1's and MRC's with multiple coatings are clear as a bell when put on pure white paper.

I tend to throw my camera over my shoulder when hiking a trail and tend not to have the lens cap on. (Nothing is worse than seeing a bird...bug or whatever and having to remove the cap!) Boink...GONE!

Hell yesterday I was in a hurry to get out the door and jammed my 105 face first on the door way! UGGGGG if I hadn't had my UV on...........I woulda said a lotta bad things!!!:wow But no harm was done at all!
Lenses cost a lot and to scratch the delicately coated glass would be a tragedy to put it mildly!
Optical glass is much softer than typical glass. I had a friend once ruin a $500 lens by not having a UV on and a tree branch brushed the optic.
Was about like a diamond scraping glass!!

Mostly the only time I take off the UV is for macro shots.

Kinda like being at a construction site without a hard hat on. There might be that one time you don't have it on and........

I look at it as a safe guard for my hard earned investment!
But if you are gonna use a UV spend a few bux more for the multi coated higher end.
There is a difference tween cheap and expensive!!

Bottom line to all this rambling.....it's just a matter of person's preference!

Andy · February 17, 2006

GraphyFotoz wrote:

Boink...GONE!

... Lens Hood....

GraphyFotoz · February 17, 2006

Andy wrote:

... Lens Hood....

Hehehehe your probably right.
I have the habit of only using one in extreme light.

GraphyFotoz · February 17, 2006

Time for me to eat some crow!

MrBook2 wrote:

I don't know if this is the one you were thinking of, but have a look:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml

--Aaron

After reading this article/link my previous post was a waste of typing/rambling!:bash
I might add it's a important read!!

Sorry Guys I come from the old school 35mm days....guess things have changed!

GraphyFotoz · February 17, 2006

Don't mean to beat a dead horse!
I found this.....is it BS?
http://www.2filter.com/faq/multicoatedfaq.html

But then again I found this!
http://www.iphotoforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19010

Maybe my bottom line wasn't in vain?

Andy.....Shay

Shay Stephens · February 17, 2006

Repeat-eth after me-eth
A filter is not a lens cap.

A filter is not a lens cap.

A filter is not a lens cap.

GraphyFotoz wrote:

Andy.....Shay

GraphyFotoz · February 17, 2006

Shay Stephens wrote:

A filter is not a lens cap.

A filter is not a lens cap.

A filter is not a lens cap.

A filter is not a lens cap.

Gotchya I think-eth?

StevenV · February 17, 2006

there's also the line of thinking that says "I'd rather 'ding' a filter than the threads on the lens itself, such that I couldn't put a filter on."

silica · February 17, 2006

GraphyFotoz wrote:

I found this.....is it BS?
http://www.2filter.com/faq/multicoatedfaq.html

When you walk into a bakery, you should not be surprised to come out with a cake. 2filter.com sells filters. Not surprising they would have an article extolling their presumed virtues

:

Shay Stephens · February 17, 2006

False sense of security
Would you use and egg-shell helmet to play football? Egg-shells are tough and are used to protect sensitve growing birds from harm. But compared to the strength of the human head, they are no match and quite useless in that capacity. What you need to protect the head is somthing stronger and tougher *than* the head.

Similarly with a camera lens. You need something tougher than the lens to protect it from harm, not something weaker and more delicate than a lens.

GraphyFotoz · February 17, 2006

StevenV wrote:

there's also the line of thinking that says "I'd rather 'ding' a filter than the threads on the lens itself, such that I couldn't put a filter on."

but your gonna get the same thing I got....put a lens hood on.

Which makes perfect sense unless you don't wanna have a big ole lens hood on a already good size lens.

Still sounds like a matter of preference to me.
But then again I didn't wanna stir things up over this.

Controversial subject yet again in photography I guess?

GraphyFotoz · February 17, 2006

silica wrote:

When you walk into a bakery, you should not be surprised to come out with a cake. 2filter.com sells filters. Not surprising they would have an article extolling their presumed virtues :

VERY true...point taken!

Bodwick · February 17, 2006

silica wrote:

When you walk into a bakery, you should not be surprised to come out with a cake. 2filter.com sells filters. Not surprising they would have an article extolling their presumed virtues :

That may have been true up to a few days ago but you may well walk out with a Rose of Muhammad nowdays. Goes well with a plate of freedom fries.

You just never know what your being sold unless you examine the contents very closely.

Bod.

Art Scott · February 17, 2006

Andy wrote:

... Lens Hood....

I must agree with Andy....Remember just HOW CLOSE that filter is to your precious lens and if it breaks, which way is the breakage going....into your lens.....if that lens hood gets dinged most won't just break [ok, I'm not refering to the cheap plastic ones I toss anyway from the lens mfg co...I am talking the "good" rubber and metal ones here] and they also protect your lens threads.

Personally, I get a step up ring [ or a really cheap collapsable lens hood and remove the cheap rubber] and find a "sony" or other brand of hard rubber hood for a video camera [broadcast type cameras...usually their hoods are 72mm up] [the one I am currently using on my 28 to 200 is glued to a 72mm collapsable hood ring] and epoxy them together.....this has saved my butt a few times ....the rubber absorbs the shock of short falls.......

System · February 17, 2006

well, I shouldn't be surprised--

there are more responses and looks on this thread about filters than any and all of my threads with pics--

I'm gonna take a pill and go to bed--

have a good weekend all and please oh please don't look at any of my photos because I would rather you DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT TO USE A DAMN UV FILTER!

Bodley · February 17, 2006

gefillmore wrote:

have a good weekend all and please oh please don't look at any of my photos because I would rather you DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT TO USE A DAMN UV FILTER!

Maybe if you post some with/without filter comparison shots you could drum up more interest

Shay Stephens · February 17, 2006

gefillmore wrote:

I would rather you DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT TO USE A DAMN UV FILTER!

Oh great, now there is another version of this infernal filter we have to deal with :uhoh

I wonder what this one purports to do? Whatever it is though, it doesn't sound too good. The marketing people should really do more homework before deciding on product names.

System · February 17, 2006

you guys might not want to give up your day jobs--

I know I'd better keep mine-

System · February 17, 2006

oh, and I just took my pill--

it can get ugly--

well, maybe irritating-

uv filter on? off?

Comments