Would you put a filter in front of new L glass?

Arkady said:
To ensure it stays worth £2k, you dullards
Click to expand...

Easy tiger, he's allowed to have his point of view.
I happen to agree with him, I can't see the point in putting a cheap piece of glass in front of a pro lens.
Personally I always used a hood and use a CPL with my 10-22 as and when needed.
Now, if there is a scenario where dust / mud / grit etc might the lens, then I can understand the reason to use a filter.
No two people with ever agree on this subject so the OP won't get a conclusive answer here.
 
Loss of quality?

Please, the difference is so tiny as to not be noticed.
 
I've damaged several filters, but have yet to damage a lens(touches wood)

Keep one on, unless it's gonna cause light problems, then in which case you can take it off...simple!

Arkady has summed it up in his own inimitable style again:thumbs:
 
Are these £30 filters actually any cop? I had been under the impression that they were not much good and you needed to spend £80-100 to start getting optical performance similar to that of the lens.
 
dunganick said:
Are these £30 filters actually any cop? I had been under the impression that they were not much good and you needed to spend £80-100 to start getting optical performance similar to that of the lens.
Click to expand...

What £30 filters are you talking about?

Hoya filters come in a range of prices, the best being the Pro-1 series:
http://www.hoyafilter.com/products/hoya/pro1d-01.html

WEX sell the 77mm size for £59.99
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-hoya-77mm-shmc-pro-1-digital-protector/p1011125
 
1. No UV/'protective' filter can possibly improve image quality.
2. All UV/'protective' filters will degrade image quality.
3. The severity of the degradation tends to decrease as filter cost increases.
4. In some situations the degradation may be small enough to not be noticed.
5. In some situations even the best filter will cause noticeable degradation.
 
I shoot in some pretty adverse places, mines and the like and always use a filter... I tend to just leave them on all the time and still think my glass does pretty well. you might want to try an uncoated one if it's going to get dirty all the time.
 
Arkady said:
What £30 filters are you talking about?
Click to expand...

Im not sure, there was mention earlier in this thread of £30 filters.

I personally have never bothered. When i looked at highly recommended filters (i have no experience of filters, so i simply went on popular choices) against replacing a front objective there was precious little difference in cost. Infact i have a damaged front objective on my Sigma 100-300 and i was quoted £120 including a service from Sigma. Perhaps Canon are more expensive to replace front elements. However to put filters on all my lenses would cost a not small amount of money. So far i'm still quids in from not buying filters.

Arkady, i appreciate why filters would make sense for you with your work.
 
I use B+W 77mm MRC F-Pro UV filters on mine, and according to Canon a filter is needed to fully weather seal most L lenses.
 
Yardbent said:
not a Skylight 1B --- it has a pink hue

not a UV - UV not needed

just a plain Protector - I got a Marumi DHG Protector - "Super DHG" is top-of-the-range

ok ok - so is Hoya HD
Click to expand...

Agreed. I use Hoya Pro1 protectors which are multicoated and have very low reflectivity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top