jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

UV filters have been discussed to death here, but that's not my topic. I'm wondering why a clear glass lens protector is so much more expensive than a filter of some kind. Two examples below.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/459666-REG/Panasonic_DMW_LMCH72_DMW_LMCH72_MC_Protector_Filter.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/889061-REG/Fujinon_107mm_MC_Protector_Filter.html

ecobin Loc: Paoli, PA

The Fuji filter must be set in a gold ring - it's for the photog who has everything.

skidooman Loc: Minnesota

What size lens does a 107mm fit?? Probably one I'll never be able to afford.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Good point. I'd like a 77mm, but not in that price range.

MtnMan Loc: ID

The answer is in the ad: "Multicoated for flare reduction". Coatings use exotic materials and can be expensive. These are also likely optical quality glass and will not soften your images as much as low price UV filters. You don't need UV filters with digital cameras because the cameras already have one on the sensor.

Vincent Loc: St. Petersburg, FL

It's too bad that Mountain Man is falling apart. I live in the area and hate to see it go.

MtnMan Loc: ID

Probably not this one. It is in Idaho.

treehugger Loc: Eastern Idaho Highlands

City of Rocks?

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I use the UV just for protection, but I think I'll get a clear one for my 28-300mm. Maybe I can find one really, really cheap. :D

MtnMan Loc: ID

Yes.

It isn't on the map and has no marker. It may have been just the light at the time we drove by.

Danilo Loc: Las Vegas

Hey Jerry,
I suspect UV filters are more vigorously shopped, causing lower profit margins. Many manufacturers just "live" for the few items in their selected product lines that allow for a better profit, to offset the "loss leaders".

Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA

I have stopped the UV filters for lens protection and use my tethered lens cap exclusively.

saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon

Well, first of all 107 is a HUNK of glass that must be anomoly free, not to mention the coatings.

Secondly, I never use a filter unless it's for a special effect or specific.

It would never occur to me to use a filter as protection, as well as the 19th element in my group of 15 in a $3000 lens. And then "cheap out" on the acquisition...

"Hey Bob, what are those aberrations on that birds beak?"

My protective lens caps are all screw on metal. I figure if one does not have the time to properly unscrew the lens cap, then one shouldn't be stalking a hungry pride of lions without taking the lens cap off beforehand. Like this guy....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1253935/Photographer-captures-amazing-images-lions-watering-hole-submerging-months.html

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Jerry, why are you asking this question when you know full well that the cost is a result of complexity following the equation: |Ψtotal>=(1/2√)|Ψ1>+(1/2)|Ψ2>+(1/2)|Ψ3>

Seriously, anti-glare is highly complex. You will find abundant reading by googling "physics of anti glare coating."
Gotta go to work today will read this weekend and will end up with a weakend from sitting in front of the computer so long.

All that tech stuff being said, anti-glare is a batch process of vapor coating surely but once the process is down and equipment depreciated on tax paper, then the cost per individual filter should be minimal. Coatings vapor deposited are almost non-existant they are so thin.

lovitlots Loc: Tottenham, Ontario, Canada

Using uv filters for protection is a good thing. The number one reason you use uv is, it has almost no effect on the picture. It does however prevent scratching the front element. and if you drop the lens it usually hits the ground front first because the front of the lens is usually the heaviest. I used to work as camera repair man and when a dropped lens came in it was, most times, simply a matter of getting the damaged filter out and cleaning the front element and the lens was good to go. As for the vapour deposition process for lens coatings, it depends what they're depositing that dictates the cost of each layer but some depositions can take as much as a day to do. The 107mm filter that is mentioned here is a size that isn't too common. This means the quantities they need to produce is small but setup costs stay constant. These costs get spread out through a small number of units and the cost per unit will be considerably higher than the more common sizes. As for using one for protection, just think of the cost of replacing a 107mm lens element. The filter is still a better deal.