Best value "protective" filter

Messages
215
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
What would you guys recommend to protect your lenses?

UV or Skylight or something else & is it worth going for Pro grade at slightly higher cost?
 
Depends on the quality of the lens you are trying to protect.

The Pro grade filters can easily cost more than the lens !!!

Personally I tend to go for Marumi filters.

Remember the filter will always "degrade" the optics - its just a question of how much.

Apparently skylight filters are slightly warmer than UV, but someone else would need to confirm that
 
Apparently skylight filters are slightly warmer than UV, but someone else would need to confirm that

Yes this is true. A skylight has a very slight pink colour to it, and when shooting with film, it would help to 'warm up' the image when shooting on a cloudy day.
 
All I can say is that I use Hoya Pro UV filters which are quite pricy.

But saying that.... theres no point in putting a £10 filter on a lens that costs £1000 +
:shrug:
 
All I can say is that I use Hoya Pro UV filters which are quite pricy.

But saying that.... theres no point in putting a £10 filter on a lens that costs £1000 +
:shrug:

Agreed. Is it worth putting a £150 filter on a £100 kit lens :bonk:
 
I tend to use the hood to protect my lenses unless I'm shooting in dirty areas like windy seaside or dusty scramble tracks then I use a Kood UV. I would rather not use the filter if possible.
 
Hmmmm pretty mixed views so far.

Any more?

I wouldn't say so.

Some people use a hood to protect their lens. If you dont want to use a hood choose a filter as follows.

Those choosing a filter will use a "basic" one if they have a cheap lens such as a kit lens.

Those with a pro lens will use a pro filter.

And the only other choice is if you want a slightly warmer look to your photographs, choose skylight over uv.

BTW - what lens are you looking to protect?
 
ive got a hoya UV (whatever the pro version is) on my 70-200 mainly for grit and dust at rallys. i dont have one on the 18-50 as its never really goes in harms way and i cant afford one for the 120-300 (lol) but then you could park a bus in the hood.
 
I have to admit to having UV/skylight 'protective' filters on all of my lenses. However, when I know that there is going to be no issue with damage, then I remove them. If nothing else, should a lens cap fall off in my bag, it can stop a fingerprint getting on the lens, thus one less clean that the lens requires. This is probably the more likely thing to cause damage to the lens, a bit of grit getting on a cloth and then wiped on the lens.
Dropping the camera/lens? I don't think that a filter is going to provide much of a crumple zone, then again, with a hood, I don't think they are going to be stiff enough to absorb that much of the impact anyway.

So, if on the beach, then I would keep the filter on. If out of the wind on a hill/landscape, then I could remove the filter (but would probably replace it with a PL anyway).

As to which is best, skylight or UV.
I believe that UV is more neutral. Skylight might cause a tint to appear.
On my more expensive lenses, then I would put Pro Digital filters. Some people on here have produced many examples of flare, mirror images etc. caused by cheap filters
 
All the filters I owned until about 3-4 months ago were quite cheap ones and I didn't see what the fuss was about. Then I got the D700 and bought a Sigma 20mm f1.8 with a Heliopan CPL filter. Wow..... The filter is a serious pro filter and you can tell the picture is crisper and less degraded whilst the effect is more dramatic from one extreme to the other. When I bought my Nikon 24-70 f2.8 a few weeks ago I also bought a pro grade UV and CPL filter for that and again wow.....

With this in mind I want pro grade filters for all my lenses now but they are all different sizes!! I have a 52,62,72,77 & 82 lens !! So I am now looking at a Lee filter system when funds will permit but I still have several things on my wish list yet :) - I still don't have ANY ND filters at all !!
 
Back
Top