uv or skylite filter: Hi does anyone know how much difference in cheap filter compared to expensive one will affect the picture?

Jim Barnard

Hi does anyone know how much difference in cheap filter compared to expensive one will affect the picture?

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Opinions vary widely and free will agree. What do you want to use the filter for?

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

Jim Barnard wrote:

Hi does anyone know how much difference in cheap filter compared to expensive one will affect the picture?

My opinion, only use a filter when it's effect is needed. "Protection" is NOT an effect.

Digital cameras do not need UV protection.

I only use polarizer filters and ND filters any more.

If you buy cheap filters the image quality will go down. By how much depends on how cheap basically.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Jim Barnard wrote:

Hi does anyone know how much difference in cheap filter compared to expensive one will affect the picture?

A cheap filter will turn an expensive lens into a cheap lens

DOOK Loc: Maclean, Australia

Dngallagher wrote:

My opinion, only use a filter when it's effect is needed. "Protection" is NOT an effect.

Digital cameras do not need UV protection.

I only use polarizer filters and ND filters any more.

If you buy cheap filters the image quality will go down. By how much depends on how cheap basically.

I fully agree. Manufacturers make zillions from the masses of people who buy unnecessary UV filters. I use a CPL or GND filter occasionally, & nothing else. Apart from the myth of 'lens protection', UV filters serve no purpose. JMO.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

DOOK wrote:

I fully agree. Manufacturers make zillions from the masses of people who buy unnecessary UV filters. I use a CPL or GND filter occasionally, & nothing else. Apart from the myth of 'lens protection', UV filters serve no purpose. JMO.

If you desire protection for a lens that will be used only with a digital camera, look at the B+W XS-Pro Clear for the filter size you need.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

Jim Barnard wrote:

Hi does anyone know how much difference in cheap filter compared to expensive one will affect the picture?

Whose opinion do you value?

DOOK Loc: Maclean, Australia

CHG_CANON wrote:

If you desire protection for a lens that will be used only with a digital camera, look at the B+W XS-Pro Clear for the filter size you need.

Thanks, but I am careful with my equipment & I use lens hoods, so I prefer to take the miniscule risk of damage & not use clear or UV filters.

Burt Hollen Loc: King of Prussia, Pa

I always buy good filters. The keep dust out, and protect the lens from bumps, etc. If you have ever banged a lens into something it could easily break. Filters are cheap protection. But, get a good one. There is virtually no image drop off.

glgracephoto Loc: Arlington, WA

There is endless debate over whether or not a protective only filter is worth using specific for protection; but far more agreement that if one does choose this, that low quality glass on a filter will degrade image quality of the best lens.

UV and skylight is basically the same thing, supposed to block UV rays only, and it is not needed these days, so any clear will be sufficient as for what it does. You would still want a good brand with far less image degrading, and multicoated to reduce added glare. I would stick with B&W, both for quality and their brass filter rings which tend to not jam so bad; but you are on your own to decide the pros and cons of using for protection only.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

DOOK wrote:

Thanks, but I am careful with my equipment & I use lens hoods, so I prefer to take the miniscule risk of damage & not use clear or UV filters.

You said it ;)

:thumbup:

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

ALWAYS use a LENS SHADE or HOOD when possible.

When working in wet, dusty, gritty, or chemical-laden atmosphere, use a clear B+W attachment. Choose NO filter for maximum lens performance the rest of the time.

pterosonus Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio USA

I'll not wade into the debate to use a filter or not for protection, but UV and skylight filters are NOT the same. Skylight filters were used in the old film days when taking pictures in open shade - i.e. when the sun is shining but your subject is under a tree. On film this caused a bluish cast, especially on whites and skin colors. Skylight filters are not needed for digital cameras with their auto white balance capabilities. Some film photographers left them on their lenses permanently as they thought they added a pleasing "warmth" to their images.

David Kay Loc: Arlington Heights IL

Dngallagher wrote:

My opinion, only use a filter when it's effect is needed. "Protection" is NOT an effect.

Digital cameras do not need UV protection.

I only use polarizer filters and ND filters any more.

If you buy cheap filters the image quality will go down. By how much depends on how cheap basically.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

David Kay Loc: Arlington Heights IL

Burt Hollen wrote:

I always buy good filters. The keep dust out, and protect the lens from bumps, etc. If you have ever banged a lens into something it could easily break. Filters are cheap protection. But, get a good one. There is virtually no image drop off.

keep the dust out of where? The front element is pretty thick and hardened. If the filter breaks the broken shards could scratch the front element. There is a difference in image quality. test for yourself.