Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?


Status
Not open for further replies.

windwaver

Senior Member
May 19, 2007
1,276
0
36
Europa
windwaver.tripod.com
#1
Lenses in olden days are easily scratched but I believe modern days lenses are very resistant to scratches. As you all know, the more lenses in between, the chances of getting better shots goes lower (due to light passing thru more glass, of course if the lens is of high quality, it doesn't really matter).

I understand a lot of ppl put a UV filter to act as a 'protective' layer but will that degrade the shots to a certain extend (even if it only can be seen when blown up real big)? I've tried with & without my Tokina UV filter but seriously I can't notice the difference (maybe I'm still not so pro yet).

Welcome any suggestion(s) :cool:
 

alternatve

Senior Member
Dec 30, 2006
1,480
0
36
#3
Scratches will damage the coating of your lens, no matter which era it is from. Modern technology hasn't given us scratch proof coatings, so I'll stick to my UV filter. Also, it prevents dust from accumulating on the surface of the lens and takes the blow when something hits it or it hits something.

I've taken thousands of pictures with the filter on and haven't seen any problems. It does degrade but in such a small degree it's not practical at all. Stick to the better filters like B+W and Hoya HMC and you'll be fine. The main problem is that it does contribute to flare if the coating isn't as good but a hood solves that too.

Samuel
 

Getz10

New Member
May 28, 2007
679
0
0
37
Jurong
www.facebook.com
#4
Better to be safe than sorry.......
I rather work with the very very min degrade & flare than damaging my 20 years old lenses :sweat:
 

giantcanopy

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2007
6,232
2
0
SG
#5
You will meet with strong opinions either way, on the protection vs the barely perceptible degradation for better filters, varying comfort zones for individuals. Either way you will not be wrong.

And besides you already convinced yourself you are unable to see the difference :)

BTW I do not use any UV/NC filters :bsmilie:

Ryan
 

windwaver

Senior Member
May 19, 2007
1,276
0
36
Europa
windwaver.tripod.com
#6
You will meet with strong opinions either way, on the protection vs the barely perceptible degradation for better filters, varying comfort zones for individuals. Either way you will not be wrong.

And besides you already convinced yourself you are unable to see the difference :)

BTW I do not use any UV/NC filters :bsmilie:

Ryan
Oh :bsmilie:. Does that mean it'll be ok if I have another circular pl lens in front of my UV lens (in outdoor shoots of course)?
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#7
Oh :bsmilie:. Does that mean it'll be ok if I have another circular pl lens in front of my UV lens (in outdoor shoots of course)?
Then you're begging for vignetting. And not all outdoor shoots require a CPL.
 

Oct 18, 2006
276
0
0
Singapore
#9
UV filters are really a personal preference, but though you need to get filters with quality matching that of your lens. Not point getting top glass and spend $20 on a cheap filter and cause multiple reflections. Personally, I do a lot of night photography and it seems that 18-200 VR is very prone to multiple reflections and flaring from light around. Have yet to try the Hoya Super-HMC but for now is my lens hood between the front of the lens and the world around. haha
 

Jan 12, 2007
378
0
0
#10
actually ur kinda right...the nikorr glasses are pretty darn well made. i had a friend shooting with a 50 1.4 i think. knocked against the wall and paint actually came of the wall and stuck onto the glass. one swipe with a cloth and all traces gone. haha. no scrathes even.

however when i shoot events i use my lens hood as my protection. i dont see vignetting so no matter what i shoot i have my lens hood on.
 

changster

New Member
Mar 24, 2008
451
0
0
Singapore
www.vamos.com.sg
#12
Scratches will damage the coating of your lens, no matter which era it is from. Modern technology hasn't given us scratch proof coatings, so I'll stick to my UV filter. Also, it prevents dust from accumulating on the surface of the lens and takes the blow when something hits it or it hits something.

I've taken thousands of pictures with the filter on and haven't seen any problems. It does degrade but in such a small degree it's not practical at all. Stick to the better filters like B+W and Hoya HMC and you'll be fine. The main problem is that it does contribute to flare if the coating isn't as good but a hood solves that too.

Samuel
agreed. after all, a teeny bit of loss in image quality is better than a scratched lens. especially if we are talking about the $$$ lenses.
 

alternatve

Senior Member
Dec 30, 2006
1,480
0
36
#13
actually ur kinda right...the nikorr glasses are pretty darn well made. i had a friend shooting with a 50 1.4 i think. knocked against the wall and paint actually came of the wall and stuck onto the glass. one swipe with a cloth and all traces gone. haha. no scrathes even.

however when i shoot events i use my lens hood as my protection. i dont see vignetting so no matter what i shoot i have my lens hood on.
If I have vignetting with my lens hood, the lens maker has some explaining to do...

Banging on the wall is a one off. What about frequent exchanging without time to secure both lens caps and just dumping it into the bag.

I used to operate without a filter at all, then with a cheap $10 rubbish filter that probably shared more optical quality with my window pane then my lens and I don't see any side effects.

Samuel
 

windwaver

Senior Member
May 19, 2007
1,276
0
36
Europa
windwaver.tripod.com
#14
If I have vignetting with my lens hood, the lens maker has some explaining to do...

Banging on the wall is a one off. What about frequent exchanging without time to secure both lens caps and just dumping it into the bag.

I used to operate without a filter at all, then with a cheap $10 rubbish filter that probably shared more optical quality with my window pane then my lens and I don't see any side effects.

Samuel
:bsmilie::bsmilie:, window pane. I only use the Circular PL in real bright outdoor conditions when the picture I want to shoot requires a PL but it's a real pain removing the UV filter & replacing it with the PL. So I'm wondering if putting the PL in front of the UV filter (for convenience sake) affects the picture quality (again, I see no difference in quality whether if there's a UV filter behind or not).

Either that, or my eyes are just plain lousy in picking details out :confused:
 

monktian

New Member
May 1, 2008
65
0
0
#16
Does anyone know currently which is the thinnest UV filter?
 

Apr 6, 2008
294
0
0
#17
Hoya makes some pretty thin lenses..the quality is pretty high as well..

With regards to using the PL over the UV, I think it should work. Works for me! :)
 

Jul 26, 2002
1,376
0
0
Woodlands
#18
PL over UV depends on the lens too. I've tried some lens without vignetting and the same setup on another set, vignetting appears. Sometimes its just very minor though and not really noticable.

I'm a firm believer in having a UV filter as protection for the lens, just have more peace of mind I guess.
 

giantcanopy

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2007
6,232
2
0
SG
#19
Why stacking a CPL over the UV filter ?! It doesn take too much time to remove the UV filter.

Ryan
 

sytan81

New Member
Mar 13, 2008
196
0
0
Yio Chu Kang
#20
stacking filters will also contribute to internal flares.. if you're serious abt taking a good photo, then do take the time to remove the UV.. :D
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom