| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/14/2011 05:31:29 PM · #1 |
Just wondering what filters (if any) you all use to protect your lenses?
I'm getting a new Canon 85mm 1.8 and want some form of filter on the end to protect the glass, but not sure what kind of filter is best (considering my knowledge of filters is minimal), and what kind of coatings (eg. anti-glare) I should be looking for.
Thanks. |
|
|
|
01/14/2011 05:46:16 PM · #2 |
I don't use 'em, or not for that purpose anyway. And I've never damaged a lens either.
But if you want to do it, the filter of choice is a UV filter. It should be "multi-coated", just like a lens, do reduce glare and refraction. Don't get the cheapest ones. Hoya makes decent mid-range filters, good bang for the buck.
R. |
|
|
|
01/14/2011 06:08:41 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I don't use 'em, or not for that purpose anyway. And I've never damaged a lens either.
But if you want to do it, the filter of choice is a UV filter. It should be "multi-coated", just like a lens, do reduce glare and refraction. Don't get the cheapest ones. Hoya makes decent mid-range filters, good bang for the buck.
R. |
Would a lens hood negate the need for a filter, since it should protect the lens from bumping into stuff and getting scratched? |
|
|
|
01/14/2011 07:04:49 PM · #4 |
Most would say it would eliminate the need, but I do use the UV filters. Hoya and B&H and now have a Sigma as well. I cannot tell the difference between shooting with or without, and it's a bit of peace of mind, though most would likely argue to stick with the hood and all is well. I'm in windy/rainy conditions often and the less I touch my lens the happier I am.
ETA: I shoot at least 50% of my shots with my 12-24mm, and that cannot accept a filter, so basically what I've just said is 50% true.
Message edited by author 2011-01-14 19:06:49. |
|
|
|
01/14/2011 07:06:20 PM · #5 |
This parrot
pecked my $1800 70-200 2.8 lens despite there being a lens hood. Fortunately I had a UV filter on it, so now I have a scratched $70 UV filter rather than a scratched $1800 lens. So I am a believer, although I also accept the argument that there is some degradation of image quality with a filter (thus definitely get a decent quality filter).
The other advantage of the filter is that over time some dust and dirt and possibly water marks are bound to accumulate on the lens, and I worry less about repeatedly cleaning a filter than the lens glass. |
|
|
|
01/14/2011 10:04:17 PM · #6 |
Would either of these be recommended:
Hoya UV (0) Haze Multicoated
B+W UV Haze Multicoat
Thanks for your suggestions and recommendations!
Garry |
|
|
|
01/14/2011 10:19:02 PM · #7 |
| Both are recommended. I have both and while I cannot really tell any optical difference (honestly haven't exactly conducted any tests), the masses swear B+W is superior, optically as well as build. I will say that my B+W filter seems a bit higher grade than my Hoyas as far as the feel and construction, though I think both would serve you well. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 11/07/2025 04:06:50 AM EST.
