Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Screw-in B+W filters are worth the expense, especially the XS-Pro models. KEH sells 'used' filters too, see if they have any B+W in the filter sizes you need.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Photography on the farm can encounter more things than just "blowing sand and salt spray". We have piles of manure in the wind, dust, freezing mud, pesticides, much more interesting things.

And UV filters are not really required for digital cameras. Clear glass is just fine for protection. Most glass does not pass significant amounts of UV light.

jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

Jeff, you will get quite a bit of blowback for even using a filter. Forget about it.
I have always used B+W XP Pro UV or Clear filters on my lenses. Primarily to protect them. I have had three occasions since 2006 where the camera dropped and the filters broke, but not the lens. Good enough for me.
Now that we have the mirrorless cameras, UV filtering is no longer required. But does not mean that using a UV will not work as well as a clear regarding your images.
Next up is your question regarding quality of filter. Anyone who has done a deep dive into image degregation using a filter has found that high quality glass will not affect the image--but poor filter quality glass definitely will.
I just purchased a Z 24-120mm and put on the B+W XP Pro 007 that I kept from other sold 77mm lenses.
The 'same' new is now the Master series.

Sidwalkastronomy Loc: New Jersey Shore

I take sunset photos at the Manasquan inlet which is flowing in and out of the ocean. There is always salt spray in air so I'll use my protective filter all the time. Dried salt spray is coarse and can easily scratch coatings. I see what's on my car window after a short time there. Waves crashing against jetty rocks produces fine mist spray.

User ID

Those are the legends in their own minds.

I will go out in such weather for a shot that I perzonally consider mediocre and or boring ... if my employer assigns, and clearly defines, the shot and supplies the gear.

Heres a dirty little secret for Hawgsters who worship "The Pros". The major money in the photo bidnez is in mediocrity and tiresome well worn old cliches (competently executed).

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Bit of a difference in doing it for one's self and an employer.....

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

UV filters were important with FILM cameras, because FILM is affected rather negatively by UV (ultraviolet) light frequencies. UV filters reduce the false appearance of atmospheric haze. They reduce the excess UV generated unfiltered electronic flash tubes. And they protect the front of a lens, sometimes.

Digital sensors have integrated cover glass that includes both infrared and ultraviolet light filtration, so the effect of a UV filter is less with digital cameras. In fact, they aren't noticeably useful at reducing UV until around 5000 to 6000 feet above sea level.

Lots of camera stores continue to sell UV filters to protect digital camera lenses, but a better choice is an optically clear glass protector with an anti-reflective coating. It reduces exposure by less than half of what a typical UV filter will.

Always be sure a lens a the back of your filter are spotlessly clean before applying the filter. Then clean the front of the filter, if needed. It's a good idea to REMOVE the filter and clean it and the lens occasionally, as fungus and air pollutants can be trapped in the cavity between them.

If you're doing astrophotography, take OFF all your filters and clean your lenses. Sandbag or stake down your tripod legs, instead. Using any filter when photographing point sources of light can create flare and image ghosting. That happens when light bounces off the front element of the lens, onto the rear surface of the filter, and is reflected back into the lens.

Canisdirus

I recently reviewed this Kolari UV filter for Amazon...I don't use UV filters...but his one is a hefty brass filter with gorilla glass. Kolari is a good company as well...if you want ultimate protection...check it out.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0942DWH5D?th=1

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Not like they hurt digital images though.
They may do nothing for digital images, but for lens protection they work just fine.
NOT something I'll worry about or reject the use of a UV.....
Same with a skylight.
I'll use either a UV, skylight, or clear. Machs nichts.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

My suggestion applies to new purchases. If you have a lens that needs a protector, but you have a UV that fits it, there’s no great need to buy a new filter.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Or a sale on UVs........

photoman43

I use B+W filters or those made by Heliopan. I do most nature photography where my lenses get exposed to bad elements, bird poop, etc and I want the needed protection of a filter. And I use a lens hood all the time too. Higher quality filters usually have better glass and a much better ring which means they last longer. I have tried Hoya, Tiffen, Nikon, etc and they are not as well made as B+ W or Heliopan. If your shooting conditions do not require protection, just do not use a filter at all. This is a personal choice decision. There is no right answer for everyone.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Knowledge is retelling the past. Wisdom is predicting the future risks to your lens. Ignoring the risks is no protection nor wisdom.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

I live in Florida and go to the beach often. The beach is made of sand and the water is saltwater. There is usually a breeze coming off the water. When the wind blows it can carry the spray from waves as well as loose sand from the beach. Both are very abrasive and can cause tiny scratches in glass. Using a filter protects the front lens element from those scratches. A filter is less expensive to replace than a lens.