Spiney Loc: Reading, PA

I’m using a Tamron DX-II 11-20 2.8 lens on my Nikon D7000. Mainly for Astrophotography, but also Automotive & Real Estate. I want. UV filter to protect the front element. Must it be a Thin Mount to avoid vignetting or is that only if I’d stack another filter on it. Also are any of the more affordable filters good enough or must I spend $50 or more for a quality UV Filter. Thanks, Dave

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Here we go...

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

DEPENDS on a lot of factors. First of all I could not find your lens, I found several 11-16 mm lenses.
OK, I will assume you have the 11-20, first off, any filter may cause some vignetting.
Personally I never use UV filters, I just use the standard lens shade for protection.
Even a thin UV filter may cause vignetting. Because it pushes your lens hood further out than some lens manufactures recommendations.
On the other hand, it may not cause vignetting.
Solution: Order two types of UV filters from B&H, regular and thin. See which one works and return the other, or return them both if neither works.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

If the front is threaded any single filter will not be a problem.
I bet just inherent vignetting of the lens is more of an issue.
Ps most lenses have this vignetting at some level.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

You do not need a UV filter for "protection." Use the lens hood and the lens cap and take care of your lens. By the way, Tamron does not make a 11-20 f2.8 but Tokina does.
If you still feel the need to use the filter buy a cheap one. It is for "protection" only, right? You will be better off shooting without a filter. Digital does not require a UV filter and forget about stacking filters if you want good quality images.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

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

1. A filter for protection does not need to be UV. I use Clear filters for front lens element protection.
2. There is less chance of vignetting with a thin filter at wider angles.
3. In general, stacking filters is not a good idea.
4. A lens hood provides good protection, but at some locations, for example the beach, it is not enough. A lens
hood will only provide limited protection of the front element from blowing sand and salt spray.
5. Buying the most expensive does not guarantee best quality, but cheap is cheap. Putting a cheap filter on a
lens can be detrimental to image quality.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Canisdirus

Digital cameras don't need UV filters.
It's a leftover vestige from film ... which did.
It's the appendix of the digital world now.

Lens cap (buy a metal screw-on type, they are great and cheap) or a lens hood are all you need.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If you want protection, then get a top quality filter to assure no impact to the image quality. Otherwise, just go with lens hood.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

"To filter or not to filter, that is the question:
Whether ’tis nobler for thy lens to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to filter and protect it against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To drop: to destroy;
No more; and by filtering to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That lenses are heir to, ’tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d. To capture, to digitize;
To make: perchance an image: ay, there’s the rub;
For in that photograph what pixels may come
When a lens is shuffled off one's table,
To bounce off the floor: there’s the rebound
That makes calamity of a beloved optic... "

Watch and decide for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds

For an ultrawide lens like an 11mm, I'd buy "slim" filters. I'd also avoid stacking filters on it.

Good quality 82mm filters ain't cheap. Don't even consider lower quality, cheaper filters.... ESPECIALLY if you plan to leave the filter on your lens a lot of the time! Every image you make through it will be directly effected by that filter. It needs to be AT LEAST as high quality as the lens it's on! A filter on a lens never has "no impact" on images. A good quality, multi-coated filter might have minimal and imperceptible effect on images in the majority of lighting conditions. A lower quality, uncoated or poorly coated filter might be quite harmful to every image made through it. I don't know about the Tokina 11-20mm in particular, but there are even lenses that for some reason don't "play well" with filters. (For example, Canon's original EF 100-400mm "push/pull" style zoom tends to "go soft" when ANY filter is installed... even top quality filters. I have no idea why this is, but many users of that lens have been surprised how much better their lens was, after they stopped using a "protection" filter on it 24/7.)

I mostly use B+W filters. Their 8-layer multi-coated in 82mm sells for $62.95. While that's technically not a "slim" filter, all B+W filter frames are pretty slim and low profile, so that would probably be okay on an ultrawide (I've had no vignetting issues with a 77mm B+W "MRC" and "F-Pro" C-Pol, ND and UV on various ultrawides... I don't have any lenses using 82mm, but should be even less of a concern than 77mm on my 10-22mm). If there were a problem with it, B+W XS-Pro with even better 16-layer multi-coatings IS a "slim" filter, selling for $77.95 in 82mm size. (Prices I quoted are per B&H Photo... other sources might be a little more or less. Shop around.)

B+W also offers "clear" filters that are a little cheaper than those UV/010 filters. However, even though in general digital cameras don't require UV filtration the way film did, there are rare occasions where a UV can be somewhat useful reducing bluish atmospheric haze. So I carry UV filters instead of clear that only serve as "protection". Both protection and UV filtration are rarely necessary... and my UV filters spend most of their time stored in my camera bag, not on my lenses... but at least a UV filter has chance of being useful a little more often, since it might serve more than one purpose.

There are other good brands, but I find it hard to beat the value of B+W (especially their C-Pol... but to some degree other filter types, too).

drobvit Loc: Southern NV

😆😆😆

User ID

It’s always “re-run season” on UHH TV.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If you'd rather clean the fingerprints, dust, and miscellaneous gunk off the filter glass rather than the lens surface, use a high-quality Clear or UV filter. If you don't care, don't use a filter. It's your lens; it's your decision.

ecurb Loc: Metro Chicago Area

If you insist on protection, look at Ikelite housings for the ultimate in protection. Otherwise just use the lens hood.