To filter or not to filter

Hi,

I just plunked down a lot of change on a rather expensive piece of glass,
and I am wondering if people generally put protective filters on their
expensive lenses or not.

The lens in question is a wide angled zoom.

Thanks

J

--
Justin F. Knotzke

http://www.shampoo.ca

On 28 Aug 2004 00:54:14 GMT, "Justin F. Knotzke"
wrote:

Hi,
I just plunked down a lot of change on a rather expensive piece of glass,
and I am wondering if people generally put protective filters on their
expensive lenses or not.
The lens in question is a wide angled zoom.
Thanks
J

Considering most people use a Skylight or UV as much as a protector
for their front element as they do to actually filter the incoming
light...I have to question you...

Would you put a protective filter on a cheaper piece of glass?

Would you want to protect a cheaper lens and not a more expensive one?

Think about it this way...if you liked the results you got with lesser
lenses with filters attached...then you should be satisfied with the
new one with a filter on it. Whatever little the filter might degrade
image quality (and it will be very little) should be more than made up
for by the superior optics of the lens.

I say protect it.

On 28 Aug 2004 00:54:14 GMT, "Justin F. Knotzke"
wrote:

Hi,

I just plunked down a lot of change on a rather expensive piece of glass,
and I am wondering if people generally put protective filters on their
expensive lenses or not.

The lens in question is a wide angled zoom.

Thanks


The best protection for your lens is a lens hood.

If you drop the lens, the hood takes the beating instead of a filter
that can shatter and damage the front element..


Colyn Goodson

http://home.swbell.net/colyng

http://www.colyngoodson.com

I've never been able to see any difference between good glass without a
filter and with a filter if it is a good filter. The wear and tear on the
front element is going to degrade the image a lot more than a filter,
anyway.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
"Justin F. Knotzke" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I just plunked down a lot of change on a rather expensive piece of
glass,
and I am wondering if people generally put protective filters on their
expensive lenses or not.

The lens in question is a wide angled zoom.

Thanks

J

--
Justin F. Knotzke

http://www.shampoo.ca

"Justin F. Knotzke" writes:

I just plunked down a lot of change on a rather expensive piece of
glass, and I am wondering if people generally put protective filters
on their expensive lenses or not.

It depends. Does that help?

I actually *don't* have filters on my three most exotic pieces of
glass, but I usually run lens shades (which have some of the same
ability to deflect impact damage, but are fairly useless against blown
sand). But I'd put filters on them in a second if going somewhere
dusty, for example.

And I take the filters *off* some of the lenses that normally have
them for some kinds of things, especially flare-inducing ones
(removing two air-glass interfaces and probably an inferior coating
job can only help!).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

"Justin F. Knotzke" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I just plunked down a lot of change on a rather expensive piece of
glass,
and I am wondering if people generally put protective filters on their
expensive lenses or not.

The lens in question is a wide angled zoom.

Thanks

J

I know not what others may do, but as for me.....No. I keep my lenses in the
best protective case I can find when not in use, and then when I use it, I
remove it from the case, remove the end caps, and attach it to my camera and
use it. Afterward, I return it to its case. I only use a filter if its
called for in the shot. A possible exception to this rule is if I am taking
pictures on a boat, or in the wind at the beach, or somewhere else in a
hostile environment where I feel that a protective filter (UV filter) is
called for.

quote who= William Graham /:

I know not what others may do, but as for me.....No. I keep my lenses in the
best protective case I can find when not in use, and then when I use it, I
remove it from the case, remove the end caps, and attach it to my camera and
use it. Afterward, I return it to its case. I only use a filter if its
called for in the shot. A possible exception to this rule is if I am taking
pictures on a boat, or in the wind at the beach, or somewhere else in a
hostile environment where I feel that a protective filter (UV filter) is
called for.

May I ask why you don't feel the need? You mention that you don't feel you
need the protection in most cases, but what is the downside of having one on
all the time?

Thanks for the reply,

J



--
Justin F. Knotzke

http://www.shampoo.ca

quote who= ColynG© /:

The best protection for your lens is a lens hood.

If you drop the lens, the hood takes the beating instead of a filter
that can shatter and damage the front element..

Thanks for the reply.

Yes, I will have a lens hood and I put one on most of my lenses simply
because I bang my camera against a lotta stuff.

I was just curious what people felt the tradeoff was in regards to a filter
or not.

Thanks again,

J


--
Justin F. Knotzke

http://www.shampoo.ca

quote who= Slingblade /:

Would you put a protective filter on a cheaper piece of glass?

Yes, and I would use a cheaper filter.

Would you want to protect a cheaper lens and not a more expensive one?

The difference is that on a cheaper lens, I'm not expecting that much from
the lens and am looking to do something different with the lens. My concern
was given that I spent a lot of money on some glass because it's expected to
perform well, would it be intelligent to put a lens filter on it thus possibly
degrading the image.

Or, given that I just spent lots of money on a lens, would it be
intelligent to NOT protect the lens.

Think about it this way...if you liked the results you got with lesser
lenses with filters attached...then you should be satisfied with the
new one with a filter on it. Whatever little the filter might degrade
image quality (and it will be very little) should be more than made up
for by the superior optics of the lens.

I say protect it.

To be totally honest with you, I don't think I have been shooting photos
long enough to determine if its the lens or me. There have been shots that I
have taken with some of my cheaper lenses where the sharpness dissapointed me.
But again, was it me, or was it the lens? So it's hard to say.

But I think I might buy a thin B+W as a protective filter.

Thanks for the reply,

J



--
Justin F. Knotzke

http://www.shampoo.ca

"Justin F. Knotzke" wrote in
:

Hi,

I just plunked down a lot of change on a rather expensive piece of
glass,
and I am wondering if people generally put protective filters on their
expensive lenses or not.

The lens in question is a wide angled zoom.


I have run into too many situations where a filter degrades the
image, and not once have I seen one do any kind of "protection".

Others will disagree, and every camera store has a damaged filter to
show you to convince you to buy one. Which is easy enough to produce, if
you felt the need to...

But let's face it - in order for a "protective" filter to be of any
use, it would have to be in conditions where something is driven straight
into the lens with enough force to damage the glass, and in a way that
wouldn't damage the lens in other ways (such as dropping it). How often do
you think it happens? I've done enough shots at the beach, where windblown
sand is an "issue", and haven't had the slightest problem. This is largely
due to the fact that, when the sand is kicked up, the camera gets faced
away. And if the sand is blowing, it's getting other places I don't want it
to - under the focusing or zoom rings, in the crevices of the camera back,
and so on. So the camera gets put away.

And recognize that good habits help a lot too. Lens caps when not in
use - always and immediately. Keep the bag clean. I NEVER hang a camera
around my neck - besides being incredibly annoying, it means your attention
is off of it as well as your control. A camera around my neck would get the
**** banged out of it, since I don't usually stroll around casually when
I'm shooting. Instead, the camera stays in a holster beltpack or a fanny
pack. Lenshoods are in use 90% of the time. And for 20 years of shooting,
not one lens has a mark on it.

As opposed to a nice collection of filter failures - image softening,
color casts, flare, and reflections. Do a few wide-angle shots at night
with bright lights and a filter, and see what happens. Very useful, if you
want to sell "UFO" shots, but rather annoying if you were after something
else...


- Al.

--
To reply, insert dash in address to match domain below
Online photo gallery at www.wading-in.net