To UV filter or not to UV filter, that is the question...

[Dave in Wales]

For over 50 years I stuck some sort of UV or protector on the front of my lenses, usually Nikkor's.

I have ceased this practice, I'll take the risk.

Why pay £££'s for top quality glass and then stick another piece on the front.

My first go-to len is the Oly 12-40 PRO, my second, the Oly 60mm.

 

[OzRay]

Why pay £££'s for top quality glass and then stick another piece on the front.

If Olympus is prepared to provide a factory filter with the likes of the 90-250mm f2.8 lens and to advertise and sell filters for their other lenses: http://www.olympus.com.au/Products/Accessories/Lens-Filters-Accessories.aspx, who am I to say it's inappropriate to use filters with lenses.

 

[Harvey Melvin Richards]

I sent my 40-150 PRO off to be fixed 2 days ago. I drove around today taking photos, and for almost every photo I was wishing I had my 40-150 PRO to use. When it comes back, it will get a protective filter covering it. My 12-40 and a couple of my others will as well. It's more than the cost of getting them fixed, it's being able to use them when you need them.

 

[usayit]

I noticed my professor has a UV on all of his lens, but not a single lens cap in any of his bags. Claims he just throws them away since with the UV he's ready to shoot whenever (and mainly does architectural it seems).

I suppose that could work, I prefer not having to deal with it, but I generally use a lens hood when the lens has a hard one available to it.

I've been the same for years.

None of my lenses in my bags (all in their own compartment) have caps... some have filters (the ones of high importance to me) and some do not.

I've dropped a lens 1 time in my life. It was while I was futzing with a lens cap.

 

[MrDoug]

I think you hit the nail on the head..

 

[MrDoug]

the first thing I do with a new lens is to put the cap back in the box and screw on a UV filter and not worry about it.. if it gets dirty no problem.. spray and wipe.. and if the filter gets scratched no big deal..

 

[PMCC]

I am still undecided. I am aware of the risk of using a lens without filter and have no problem with the optical quality of a good filter, But using a $50 filter just to protect a sub-$200 lens (that is all my lenses)?

 

[OzRay]

I am still undecided. I am aware of the risk of using a lens without filter and have no problem with the optical quality of a good filter, But using a $50 filter just to protect a sub-$200 lens (that is all my lenses)?

If you scratch or otherwise damage your sub-$200 lens, you might as well buy a new one; as I'm pretty sure that freight and repair costs will likely exceed the lens value.

 

[chaconi]

If Olympus is prepared to provide a factory filter with the likes of the 90-250mm f2.8 lens and to advertise and sell filters for their other lenses: http://www.olympus.com.au/Products/Accessories/Lens-Filters-Accessories.aspx, who am I to say it's inappropriate to use filters with lenses.

Olympus ahs filter for sale but no information except this:

PRF-ZD95 PRO PROTECTION FILTER and it costs a crazy $325​

What's up with that?

 

[John King]

Olympus ahs filter for sale but no information except this:

PRF-ZD95 PRO PROTECTION FILTER and it costs a crazy $325​

What's up with that?

Any 95mm filter will cost you a kidney ...
Even the 72mm one for my latest lens (f/4 8-25) cost me around AUD 200.

OEM filters (probably made by Hoya) will cost extra for the branding.

 

[Carbonman]

Any 95mm filter will cost you a kidney ...

The OMDS 95mm filter is $429.99 CDN. I'm more concerned about impact/breakage of the front element, not dust or water marks. The Sigma 95mm WR clear ceramic filter is $369.99 CDN. It's supposed to be very tough.
I don't have any filters on my lenses at present.

 

[chaconi]

I use the

B + W Clear Protection Filter for Camera Lens – Ultra Slim Titan Mount (T-PRO), 007, HTC, 16 Layers Multi-Resistant and Nano Coating, Photography Filter​

 

[PakkyT]

Olympus ahs filter for sale but no information except this:

PRF-ZD95 PRO PROTECTION FILTER and it costs a crazy $325​

What's up with that?

Sounds like you will need a protection filter for your protection filter!

 

[Mack]

I've wondered if a filter, being parallel to the sensor, is the reason hot spots show up in IR cameras?

Expensive lenses with a lot of glass usually have one parallel lens surface to the sensor and oddly, they seem to be prone to IR hot spots with light bouncing back and forth between them creating a bright one. Conversely, a cheap lens having fewer lenses, may not have a surface parallel to the sensor and those lenses do not cast a hot spot.

I do know with some lenses I get a vignette, even with a thin one with no threads in the front. Worse is when the lens hood will not attach to the bayonet front end due to the filter's diameter size or its thickness so the hood will not lock onto the bayonet. With that issue, I'd need to go sans any hood and maybe deal with any possible flare at the filter. Given that issue with the fit, flare, hue shifts from coatings, and any vignette, I usually prefer a lens hood verses a filter for both image and lens protection - and often a rubber hood if it is heavy and prone to hit lens first on setting it down on a hard surface.

 

[John King]

The OMDS 95mm filter is $429.99 CDN. I'm more concerned about impact/breakage of the front element, not dust or water marks. The Sigma 95mm WR clear ceramic filter is $369.99 CDN. It's supposed to be very tough.
I don't have any filters on my lenses at present.

Graham, I would definitely have a filter on your highly expensive 150-400.

However, telephotos being extremely sensitive to the quality of filters, I would definitely try before you buy to ensure that there is no image degradation. Probably safest to pony up for the genuine Olympus filter, much as it pains me to say it!

Alternatively, the highest quality B&W, or Hoya from a reputable supplier with a good returns policy. B&H springs to mind.

 

[SnapShot69]

I have a good quality protective filter on all my lenses. I can see no difference in image quality. I agree with John King that it is best to try the filter before you buy if possible because I have found that filter manufacturers do vary a bit.

 

[fortwodriver]

I've wondered if a filter, being parallel to the sensor, is the reason hot spots show up in IR cameras?

Expensive lenses with a lot of glass usually have one parallel lens surface to the sensor and oddly, they seem to be prone to IR hot spots with light bouncing back and forth between them creating a bright one. Conversely, a cheap lens having fewer lenses, may not have a surface parallel to the sensor and those lenses do not cast a hot spot.

I do know with some lenses I get a vignette, even with a thin one with no threads in the front. Worse is when the lens hood will not attach to the bayonet front end due to the filter's diameter size or its thickness so the hood will not lock onto the bayonet. Need to go san hood and deal with any flare.

In the 70s there were "ghostless" filters, which had a curved glass. The idea was that any flare-producing, non-image-forming light would be bent up into the black flocking of the lens and not onto the film. Once coated, and then multicoated filters became a thing, the industry determined they weren't necessary.

I still have a few Toshiba ghostless filters that my dad bought in the 70s: Some Skylight 1A and 1B filters.

 

[Mike Peters]

In my experience B+W MRC 010 filters have no negative impact on the lens performance and I use one on every lens I own. I never ever use front lens caps, so when the filter gets beat up, I get a new one rather than a new lens. However, if I need to use a VND I'll take my B+W off so I only have one filter on at a time. I find the SYRP VND is very good.