I\'m with the majority, I guess. I very rarely use a so-called \"protection\" filter. When I do, it\'s for extreme conditions such as the base of a waterfall (gritty spray) or maybe during an extreme dust storm.
I have several reasons for NOT using a filter. First reason is I\'ve had a number of problems with them screwing up a shot, mostly because of flare or ghosting. Had several shots ruined that I was being paid to shoot. Second reason is I think a filter is just as likely to damage my lens as it is to protect it. I once had a lens fall \"face\" down, and the filter shattered. The shards of glass destroyed the front element. If had been using the lenscap instead, there wouldn\'t have been any damage. Third reason is it\'s actually cheaper for me to NOT use filters than to use one. To put high quality coated filters on all my lenses would actually cost me MORE than a repair would.
I use Nikon pro f2.8 zooms, and virtually never use a filter on them. I daily shoot outdoors in the very worst conditions that the Dakotas can throw at me. All of my lenses are perfect! Only had one problem, and was BECAUSE of the filter. I do use the lenscap, always, when not taking a shot. Lenscaps are FAR tougher than flimsey glass filter. I also use lens hoods. Those do two things. First, they deflect stuff from hitting the lens. Second, they absorb the blow and save the lens. All in all, I think the idea that a UV filter is goint to protect much of anything to be wishful thinking. Just as apt to cause damage in my own experience.
I\'m with the majority, I guess. I very rarely use a so-called \"protection\" filter. When I do, it\'s for extreme conditions such as the base of a waterfall (gritty spray) or maybe during an extreme dust storm.
I have several reasons for NOT using a filter. First reason is I\'ve had a number of problems with them screwing up a shot, mostly because of flare or ghosting. Had several shots ruined that I was being paid to shoot. Second reason is I think a filter is just as likely to damage my lens as it is to protect it. I once had a lens fall \"face\" down, and the filter shattered. The shards of glass destroyed the front element. If had been using the lenscap instead, there wouldn\'t have been any damage. Third reason is it\'s actually cheaper for me to NOT use filters than to use one. To put high quality coated filters on all my lenses would actually cost me MORE than a repair would.
I use Nikon pro f2.8 zooms, and virtually never use a filter on them. I daily shoot outdoors in the very worst conditions that the Dakotas can throw at me. All of my lenses are perfect! Only had on problem, and was BECAUSE of the filter. I do use the lenscap, always, when not taking a shot. Lenscaps are FAR tougher than flimsey glass filter. I also use lens hoods. Those do two things. First, they deflect stuff from hitting the lens. Second, they absorb the blow and save the lens. All in all, I think the idea that a UV filter is goint to protect much of anything to be wishful thinking. Just as apt to cause damage in my own experience.
Kent in SD
Jul 10, 2010 at 10:00 PM
Previous versions of Two23's message #8646643 « Do you guys use filters for protection? »
