johngault007 Loc: Florida Panhandle

He did, in this thread.

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

This is UHH! There is no such thing as settling a matter.

Bill_de Loc: US

It would not be unethical to just throw it out, or maybe donate it to a school.

https://study.com/articles/Schools_with_Camera_Repair_Training_Programs_How_to_Choose.html

--

PierreD

It will be blurry....

PierreD

Thanks for including "may" in your reply... it being that there is essentially zero actual evidence (but many unsubstantiated claims) that *quality* filters result in any detectable image degradation.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Scratches on lens surfaces scatters light differently than clear lenses, causing flare and loss of contrast. The more scratches the worse it is.

When I look at my lenses that I've had for 5+ years - and I see pristine glass - even though I've never cleaned them - I think it is worth it to use a decent quality filter clear or otherwise, but multi-coated. Yes, there is a very minor effect - virtually undetectable but I'll take it. I have been to beaches, waterfalls, in 100° and in -5°, dusty environments, etc - and the glass is still pristine. And if you point a lens with scratches near a light source, or take shots at night - you WILL see the effects of scratches.

I have all of my lenses that can take filters covered with filters. An old habit from when lenses were either uncoated or coated with lower quality coatings.

Also, to add another anecdote - I have dropped or had mishaps like camera bag straps failing - and for the most part, lenses with filters have fared better than those without. That is why I use a filter. Even wind-blown sand at the beach can etch the surface of a lens - so I just keep them on. A filter is a lot cheaper to replace than a front element.

Chuck B

We're the wrenches SAE or Metric?😇

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Gene you have taken the words right out of my mouth. Why clean an expensive lens when cleaning and possibly wearing the glass of a filter is cheaper in the long run. I don't clean my lenses either but I do clean filters. I have never seen any degradation of my photos due to a filter.

Dennis

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

When you remove your filter,
that's when your photography will shine.
Then you can work on points for style.
Like the club tie, and the firm handshake,
a certain look in the eye and an easy smile.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

You made that up...

Dennis

Quixdraw Loc: x

Lessee - a politician, car salesman or insurance agent.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

So, let me make sure I understand your point....

You dropped your lens, the filter broke, the lens cap is ruined and there are glass shards embedded in the front element of the lens requiring it be sent to Nikon for repair and you are giving this and an example why people SHOULD use a "protection filter"?

It could just as easily be used as a good example why one SHOULD NOT use a protection filter! After all, the lens is still being sent off for repair, so the filter appears to have failed to do its one and only purpose.

There really is no way to say, one way or another, whether or not a filter offers any protection without truly scientific testing.

So, please purchase a couple dozen of those lenses... fit half of them with protection filters, half without. Now drop them from various heights and landing in various ways on various types of surfaces. Compile the data on how well the lenses survived and give us the statistics.

Of course, this data will only apply to that particular lens... So please repeat these tests with a couple dozen copies of any other lens you'd like to suggest would be "protected" by a filter.

Or just watch Steve's video where he's done some testing with a limited selection of filters and lenses at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds

I've broken several filters over the last 40+ years. Some caps and hoods, too. I've dented a lens or even knocked one hard enough that it would no longer focus, even wore out the focus mechanisms on a few and had some apertures fail... But never significantly damaged the elements of a filterless lens... and have seen more than one lens that was actually damaged by a broken filter.

Sure, I've got "protection" filters for my lenses. They're stored separately in my bag and used in particular situations where they might actually serve a purpose.... out shooting in a sandstorm, shooting at the beach, for example. In other words, not very often. My C-Pols see a whole lot more use. Even though I don't use them very often, I would guess my ND filters even see more use than my "protection" filters.

When it comes to "protection" filters, my recommendation is to do whatever makes you feel good. In some instances, a filter may negatively effect an image... but only rarely and usually not very much. In some rare instances, a filter might actually provide some "protection".... though likely only in very rare circumstances. After all, how much "protection" can be expected from a thin piece of glass? But also be aware that in rare circumstances a filter might even cause damage. It's virtually impossible to quantify either way.... good or bad. Lenses can be insured and repaired, if needed... sometimes at a cost not all that different from buying a quality filter that will have minimal effect on image quality.

So just do whatever makes you feel good... whatever encourages you to get out and shoot without fretting about your lens!

P.S. Why are you trashing the camera bag? Is it the bag's fault that you dropped it?

Dan Ausec

Dan Ausec

Dan Ausec