Rumor has it that a new type protector will be available in 2019 from Sony, Canon, Nikon and Fuji to guard against the rising costs of UV filters. Prices are beginning to sky rocket as of late from the Chinese embargo recently implamented.
Some looking for solutions are asking legislators to step in with measures that would force a lower deductible when insuring their UV filters.
This new protector device is said to be plastic, UV resistant, protects your current UV filter, cost up to 1/2 the price of a standard UV filter, Simple to install and flame resistant.
Amazon will be the first to offer the new protectors, Several others plan extensive testing with results by mid summer...
DirtFarmer
Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
Sorry to be late to this thread. Here is my standard post for protective filter threads.
https://petapixel.com/2015/08/31/photo-mythbusters-how-much-do-uv-filters-actually-protect-your-lenses/I do not use a filter under normal circumstances. However, on a farm I frequently encounter blowing dust, mud, and other noxious substances found on farms. If I expect to encounter something like that (and if I were to visit the ocean frequently I would include salt spray in that list)* I generally put a filter on my lens.
My camera has hit the ground once. Lens down. No filter. I had the hood on. No damage to the lens. (The hood stays in the normal position in my bag also).
YMMV. You are free to make your own decision. I have made mine.
*I visited a zoo once and we were advised not to stand close to the fence when the rhinoceros was facing the other way.
DirtFarmer wrote:
Sorry to be late to this thread. Here is my standard post for protective filter threads.
https://petapixel.com/2015/08/31/photo-mythbusters-how-much-do-uv-filters-actually-protect-your-lenses/I do not use a filter under normal circumstances. However, on a farm I frequently encounter blowing dust, mud, and other noxious substances found on farms. If I expect to encounter something like that (and if I were to visit the ocean frequently I would include salt spray in that list) I generally put a filter on my lens.
YMMV. You are free to make your own decision. I have made mine.
Sorry to be late to this thread. Here is my standa... (
show quote)
The test is flawed and not realistic.
I have saved lenses with filters and destroyed one without one and since then use them and have only lost filters since and never a lens.
DirtFarmer
Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
Architect1776 wrote:
The test is flawed and not realistic.
I have saved lenses with filters and destroyed one without one and since then use them and have only lost filters since and never a lens.
As I said, YMMV.
My method has worked for me. If your method works for you, by all means continue so.
Nikon camera, Nikon lenses, Nikon filters. Buy the best and get the best. N/C filter on all my glass. Really!
If you think it really detracts from your shot then maybe you should rethink your shooting style. Just saying.
Everyone wants to be a Picasso but the reality of that happening is not compromised by a filter. Really.
Happy shooting to all you filter and non-filter users😁
(Wasn’t that about cigarettes years ago?)
StevenG wrote:
Over the years I have read a number of pros and cons on this site regarding the use of UV filters for lens protection. Personally, I have always used one, and never gave it much thought. A couple of weeks ago when I was unloading my car for my granddaughter's birthday, my camera bag fell out of the back of my SUV. My lens was attached to my camera. The lens cap broke, and the UV filter was smashed to bits. However, the lens was completely in tact, with absolutely no damage! And, no damage to the camera (which had nothing to do with the filter). Lucky me! I immediately bought a replacement UV filter!
Over the years I have read a number of pros and co... (
show quote)
I have always bought a Nikon NC filter for each of my lenses. Open the lens box, pop off the lens cap, and put on the filter. That, and a Lenspen, and I feel good to go.
I always use a UV filter and recommend that my students also use one for lens protection.
rook2c4 wrote:
Did you consider the possibility that the lens would have been intact, regardless of the presence of the UV filter? UV filters are thin enough to push your thumb through them without much effort. It does not take much force at all to break them. However, the front element on the lens is typically a fairly thick chunk of glass... unless you are super strong, don't expect to be able to push you thumb through it!
I'm not saying it is impossible the flimsy UV filter played a role in keeping your lens from shattering, but it is more likely the filter did nothing at all.
Let's say, you have a steel plate. you place a glass sheet over it. Then you shoot an arrow at the glass-covered steel plate. The glass shatters, yet there is no apparent damage to the steel plate.
Can one therefore conclude the glass actually protected the steel plate from destruction?
Did you consider the possibility that the lens wou... (
show quote)
If we analyze the problem as ballistics, any material that our moving object encounters specially when it breaks, takes energy away from the projectile and lessen impact velocity/penetration. Bulletproof glass are many layers of thin glass glued together. As each sheet breaks, it slows the bullet to the point it stops and the last sheets are not damaged.
UV filters will help with dirt and impacts. How much will depend on the circumstance. On the other hand, how much it affects the image will highly depend on the quality of the filter. A good quality UV filter should be negligible.
DirtFarmer
Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
Just a note on filters:
There are situations in which a circular polarizer or a neutral density filter are appropriate to use (not as protection but for the modification of the image).
In those cases it is very possible that you will want to remove any protective filter before applying the image modifying filter. The reason for this is that if you start stacking filters you may start to get vignetting. In general this will occur on wide angle lenses or at the wide angle end of a zoom lens, but it really depends on the lens you are using.
I think we all have a story like this. I careful as you can be my $1500 70 200 rolled down the
couch while I was going to place it in my bag. The filter broke the lens fine.
I have often wondered about a great lens and camera with a $30 UV or ND filter in front.
Not sure.
boberic wrote:
Facts don't matter? 2+2=4 no matter how any one feels about it.
Ok course, there is little argument about math, if you feel (believe) in the principles of math. The facts of which I was speaking were the evidence provided in making decisions. For example, many people ignored the facts about the harm of smoking.
This is exactly what I do with all my lenses, and have done for many years. Even when a photographer is very careful, there are many seemingly minor hazards to confront, especially in landscape and wildlife photography, that can inflict serious damage to your lens's front element. Better safe than sorry.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.