kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Or... you could just answer the question.

ralfstinson Loc: SF Bay Area

Sometimes monochrome light (like from the aurora) can set up an interference pattern with a filter, so there are times when it should not be used. But the filter clearly gives some significant protection to the lens. Lens hood also gives protection, both from physical damage and bright side light. Adjust what you do for the conditions.

KarenKaptures Loc: New Jersey

I was inside my carpeted home doing headshots. When I was done I noticed the filter on my lens was cracked. It totally protected my lens; I don’t remember damaging my lens or dropping my camera. I do not care for lens hoods and have them on backwards if at all.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

All these claims "a filter saved my lens" are utter B.S. There is no way to say one way or another if that's true. In fact I've seen broken filters do damage to lenses (not mine, thankfully) when broken shards are jammed into the front element. I just got in a vintage lens that has a filter on it with a bent rim that's going to be very difficult to remove without doing damage to the lens. But all the claims either way are meaningless.

Fortunately, someone is nutty enough to actually conduct some semi-scientific tests whether or not filters offer any "protection". Watch this and decide for yourself... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds

Filters are actually not designed or intended for "protection" and lenses don't actually need "protection", let alone what little "protection" some thin piece of glass might provide.

Sales people making commission are only too happy to sell you a high profit item like a filter. Filters serve other purposes. Learn what those are, buy good quality that will have minimal negative effect on images and use filters appropriately. (Hint: Shooting digital, very few filters are necessary. Most can be emulated very well in-camera or in post-processing.)

The very best protection for your precious new lens is the lens cap that came with it.

While shooting, the hood that came with the lens (usually) can provide good physical protection as well as shading the lens from oblique light to potentially improve image quality. In fact, when using a filter, it's wise to use a lens hood to protect the filter!

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

Yeah this topic has been beaten to death on this forum, but probably not as much as Canon vs Nikon, FF vs crop, RAW vs JPEG, DSLR vs Mirrorless.

My advice under normal, camera-lens friendly conditions, a fitted, rigid hood is all you need - unnecessary filters are, well, unnecessary - it's another piece of glass for your image to traverse. But if you are in the middle of a sandstorm in the Nevada desert or out at sea with lots of salt spray, by all means use a neutral or UV filter - and maybe perhaps a protective housing/ cover for the camera/lens.

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

I am putting some gear together couple of years ago. 70 200 G lens rolls of my small couch in my office and hits the tile floor.
Hood wasn't on. Filter shatters lens is fine. Must of hit that front edge. When I put lens away I turn hood around or take off lens.
Ken Rockwell says don't put filters on lens. Their is no doubt that the filter protects lens for dirt, sand water etc etc.
Whether is effects the lens performance. I dont know.

JeffDavidson Loc: Originally Detroit Now Los Angeles

Although lens hoods may add some protection, their main purpose is to help prevent stray light from entering.

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

Steve Perry said it all:
https://youtu.be/P0CLPTd6Bds

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

A UV filter protects the front element as much as a price of hard paper would. I.e. close to nothing.

A lenshood doesn’t protect the front element from a direct impact of a small stick or tree branch. But it protects the front of the lens.

I find the question a no brainer. Adding a cheap filter to an expensive piece of engineering make no sense. All it does is worsening the image quality if anything.

willaim Loc: Sunny Southern California

Lens hoods and filters do different things and they do work together. The lens hood will help prevent lens flare and at the same time can help protect the lens from frontal damage. The UV filter will cut down on the UV rays and will also protect the front element from scratches, etc. A filter is cheaper then replacing a lens. Personally, I use a polarizing filter and lens hood for outdoor shooting. Use a clear filter for indoors and at night. By the way, a lens does come with a lens hood or you can buy an aftermarket hood that is rubber and can fold back. Screws right into the front of the filter.

swartfort Loc: Evansville, IN

Ok, Ok,,, be nice, play nice!!! You did see he was a new user here right? Obviously he has not seen previous posts. Please be kind to new users. Just as new photographers, no question is a dumb question, if you feel a snarky answer coming, just pass on it and leave it and the new user alone!!! PLAY NICE!!!

Toment Loc: FL, IL

Both are best, but hood should be first.

fotoman150

I use both. On my old Minolta I was talked into not putting a filter on because it ruins the expensive lens. Why get a nice lens and ruin the image by putting a filter on it. Then I let my Mother-in-law use the camera and it came back with a scratch on the 70-210 zoom. Never again. I always put a filter on the lens and use the lens hood. Lesson learned.

fotoman150

Which is better Raw or jpg?

Sorry I couldn't resist.

cybercord Loc: Ga, USA

No Smooth is better, cause I put nuts on afterwards. :)