I will wade into this endless debate and quagmire topic, that never dies. In my four decades as a professional photojournalist covering everything from pro sports to war conflict, I have always protected my vast lens investment with top optical quality filters, most nano-coated , with full anti-glare properties.

I have never lost optical quality with the best top optical quality filters, and there has never been an MTF-standard optical test that has proved otherwise, never. . I have made literally millions of images around the world, and never lost an assignment, never lost a publication, never lost a client, or ever lost an award by using the best top optical quality filters over my lenses, ever.

And these top optical quality filters (I prefer B+W nano-coated) have saved countless lens front elements from flying debris, grit, sand, mud, water, oil, chemicals, and accidental intrusions, over excited kids, fellow packs of competitive photographers at events, accidental trips, falls, and attacks from angry mobs and even angry mobsters, and even an angry crooked judge being photographed, all true happenings. Many a filter has sacrificed its life and saved one of my lenses, just a fact.

Lens hoods I also use, but lens hoods alone will do nothing for direct intrusion. I know this from vast real-world experiences.

And when I go to trade or sell any of my lenses, I remove the filter and I have a pristine front element to sell, giving me more value every time.

As far as bird feathers, and insect wings, here are just a couple of many shots I could show you, all made with top optical quality filters over my lenses.

1-2) Full frame and a tight crop of same shot; A great White Egret bends its neck to clean its feathers on the Caribbean island of Sint Maarten/St. Martin. Sony A1, Sony 200-600mm lens (with a B+W top optical protective filter), 591 mm, ISO 1600, f6.3, 1/2000 sec., handheld. All natural sunlight.

3) A dragonfly in Manistee National Forest, USA. Sony A7III, Sigma Art 70mm f2.8 Macro DG lens (with a protective B+W filter), 70mm, ISO 6400, f22, 1/1000 second, handheld, all natural sunlight only.

Click on download to see better quality of the images.

This pro will continue to use top optical quality protective filters on all my lenses. Do what you want with your lenses.

Cheers and best to you all.

Over the years I have broken a few filters and not from just the ring but actual rock impact on the glass.
No damage to the lens, just unscrewed the filter, and upon returning home bought a new one.
I do not always have a filter on. I evaluate potential damage for the outing and potential risk and decide on using or not.
So like most things in life there are no hard and fast rules. Just intelligent evaluations and choices.

I’m sure it has been said before, but I just want to reiterate and reinforce that if you think that the filters that you put on the end of your expensive lenses (between about $20-$140) are too expensive, guess again. Yesterday, getting ready for a trip to Europe I had my R5 and 16-35mm lens sitting on the granite top of the island in our kitchen. I also had a carrying strap attached to it, and when I walked away from it I didn’t notice that the strap fell off the countertop. When our Bernese came in from outside, he came in, as he usually does, very excited with his tail wagging near the speed of light and it came in contact with the strap pulling the camera and lens to the stone tile floor. CRASH! As my heart sunk to the level of the camera, I reached down and picked it up noticing that the edge of the filter took the hit and was bent inward, and the glass was shattered. To make a long story short, after I was able, with the help of a Dremil drill, to cut the filter’s ring loose without damaging the lens’ edge, I remounted the lens to the camera, and much to my relief, lens and camera work fine. Wew. Spend the money.