67mm lens protection filter

C

Cobbler72

Messages
46
Edit My Images
No
I have just ordered a Canon 70-200L f4 and would like a recommendation for a good 67mm filter to leave on the lens to protect it. Does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks.
 
From what ive read on here your better off with a lens hood.
 
I would deffently get a u.v. filter to protect the lens.

Head over to Amazon, i would be looking at a Hoya Digital Pro Protector Filter or U.V or a Canon UV filter or a B+W Filter, you have an L series lens their is no point spending that money on glass and putting a cheep filter on it.
 
SAVA9E said:
From what ive read on here your better off with a lens hood.
Click to expand...

its cheaper to replace a filter than replace a lens as you got a scratch on it.

when I order a new lens I always factor in the price of a filter depending on your budget you could go for a jessops own brand but my personal preference is the hoya pro range uv filters when you've paid you for an L lens you want to put the best quality glass you can afford infront of your lens
 
Nawty said:
Any most people on here definitely wouldn't.

Have a search for "uv filter", there are millions of threads about it...
Click to expand...

Thats fine, but every photographer i no uses them, i use them and will always use them. I have never thought that my pictures have suffered due to having a U.V filter on them.
 
Get a protection filter if you want, but be aware that there are real image quality issues - serious ones, in certain cirumstances.

Search for recent threads and examples.
 
So if I decide to buy one then the

Hoya 67mm Pro-1 Digital UV Screw in Filter

at £28 on Amazon is the one to go with? What are skylights - are they any different for this job?
 
Ohhh dude, now look what you've done ;)

open-a-can-of-worms.jpg



For what it's worth, I use a filter + hood on my 17-50, because I do some close up sports stuff on the beach. My 70-200 just has a hood on :)
 
I have never really bothered with forums etc... this is pretty new to me i have never heard of their being an issue with picture quality when using U.V filters, i have never ever noticed. They certainly have saved my lens's more than once in the rain,mud,sand etc...

Its pretty interesting i just bought a 24mm 1.4L and there is no way i am not putting a u.v. filter on it.

What have people noticed when using a U.V filter? GA form of ghosting or something?
 
Hi Cobbler, thats the perfect filter for the job i have them on all my lens's at the moment and they seem fine. I think you should get one, i beleave the skylight adds a slight hue to the image... I would either go for a U.V or a digital protector. Good luck!
 
Seems like a few dont want me to talk about this :)

You say "I would either go for a U.V or a digital protector" - what is the difference?
 
brad_wakefield said:
I have never really bothered with forums etc... this is pretty new to me i have never heard of their being an issue with picture quality when using U.V filters, i have never ever noticed. They certainly have saved my lens's more than once in the rain,mud,sand etc...

Its pretty interesting i just bought a 24mm 1.4L and there is no way i am not putting a u.v. filter on it.

What have people noticed when using a U.V filter? GA form of ghosting or something?
Click to expand...

On the whole they don't affect image quality that much UNLESS you are shooting into light sources, at which point you tend to get lots of flare and loss of contrast, both things that simply using a lens hood would counteract. A lens hood also counteracts knocks and bangs better than a UV filter.

They do have their uses if sand/water/mud/beer is flying about but otherwise, for me, they are not worth using.
 
Cobbler72 said:
Seems like a few dont want me to talk about this :)

You say "I would either go for a U.V or a digital protector" - what is the difference?
Click to expand...

On a digital camera, nothing.

UV filters are a relic from film photography days - digital cameras don't need them so you may as well have a plain piece of glass with some anti reflective coatings on, i.e. a digital protector.

A skylight filter does have a slight pinkish tinge but you probably wont see this as auto white balance will correct for it (or you can in PP).
 
I have found this on Amazon (via CameraKing)

Hoya Protector Pro 1 Digital 67 (£24)

From what has been said I here then IF I get anything then this sounds slightly more favourable than the UV filter suggested earlier since I wouldnt be using the UV bit with Digital.

Sound about right?
 
Thanks Brad - appreciate you taking the time to offer me advice.

(Thanks to all the others who I didn't bore too much ;) )
 
I always use a filter but I suspect it's largely a hangover from my film days when I used Skylight 1a's. These days it's just a protection filter as UV & Skylight simply aren't needed as others have pointed out. Hoya Pro1 Digitals are what I use. I also always use a lens hood.
 
brad_wakefield said:
Hoya make a digital protector filter which is just a piece of glass, you could also get a UV filter which reduces the UV light.
Click to expand...

Digital sensors have built in UV filters, so it's pointless putting a UV filter on the lens. UV filters were invented for film cameras where the UV light would cause haze on the film.

Front elements are very tough and VERY difficult to scratch or damage. Anything hard or tough enough to damage a lens front element will just smash the filter anyway, this is where hoods offer more protection. They also help improve contrast as they prevent stray light from hitting the element.

The only time a "protection" filter is of use is in harsh environments, like rally's, or beaches if you suspect someone might try and kick sand in your face. Even so, a light wipe with the correct cleaning items will clean it with no issues.

I have never, in 20 years, wasted money on a UV (because digital cameras don't need them) or "protection" filters, and I have never had a front element damaged.

As for IQ issues, yes, you'll get ghosting and flare, and loss of contrast and with really poor / cheap filters, softness.

Don't waste your money.
 
Last edited:
brad_wakefield said:
I work as a press photographer, my kit is always getting bashed around thats why i always use u.v. filters, sometimes i am in harsh inviroments, i have never noticed any issue.
Click to expand...

Fair do's. But, for example, landscape photographers or portrait photographers will be more critical IQ wise than a lot of press togs, who's main aim is simply to get the shot, rather than worry about the quality of the image.

But I would have thought a press tog would make more use of hoods, rather than filters (unless you are reportaging in a middle eastern war environment) especially if it's being bashed around, as hoods are far more protective against blunt force impacts.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top