Are folks using UV filters?

[onesock]

Are you guys using UV filters on your lenses as a "protective measure"? Coming from a video background, I'm a bit new to the photography side of things. A friend told me that I should get one since it protects your lens, but I'm not very happy with the results of the 62mm ProMaster UV filter I purchased.

Do most of you just run with straight glass? It seems from looking online that there are definitely two schools of thought. Before I got the filter I'd just keep the lens cap in my other hand and put it back on as soon as I was done recording a shot.

[Martti Ekstrand]

I use Kenko Pro1 Digital Protector which is a clear glass that do basically nothing but physical protection of the front element which otherwise would be full of my thumbprints.

[Ben_B]

Have a clear element on the front of one of my lenses that came with it...really like having that. Not using anything for kit and other lens...but they're doing ok...I carry a cleaning cloth with me and am usually somewhat compulsive with it.

[Mike@AF]

I have a Hoya Super HMC UV(0) filter on all of my lenses. I see no ill effects. Actually I didn't notice any change to the image.

[Osslund]

UV are a cheap way to protect your lens. But when filming you easily get reflections from the UV and in many situations it's best to remove the UV and shoot without.

[j]

I never use clear or UV filters, I just take caution not to scratch or smudge a lens.

If you look at a film shoot, they *never* put superfluous glass in front of the lens. The only time is if they expect trouble: car shots, rain, mud, etc. And their lenses often cost more than a full Red setup.

The mindset to put on a protective filter comes from the video production side of things where it is recommended to do so mostly because of the skill level of most consumers.

You can do so if it makes you feel more secure, or just take caution.

My .02

[onesock]

That's what I was thinking. I never had any problems with earlier video cameras, so I guess I shouldn't be worrying too much. I guess I also don't see the point of a protective filter if you have to take it off before shooting- wouldn't a lens cap do the same thing?

I might look into some of the higher end Hoyas if you guys have had good luck and no ill effects.

[Martti Ekstrand]

If you look at a film shoot, they *never* put superfluous glass in front of the lens.
Yes but if you look at a cinema lens it's very differently constructed, often has a bit of tube on the front end so the glass isn't directly within reach, has a lens cap that really stay on until intentionally removed, comes in very sturdy padded boxes, sits behind a matte box and generally have one person with the very specific job description of taking care of it like a newborn baby. It's a very different situation than ones most people here are using their GH1s.


The mindset to put on a protective filter comes from the video production side of things where it is recommended to do so mostly because of the skill level of most consumers.
Actually pro still photographers, especially out in the field have been using UV filters as a protective measure for half a century which I believe predates video production by a long run.

[j]

> job description of taking care of it like a newborn baby.
> It's a very different situation than ones most people here are using their GH1s.

Exactly. We do not disagree.

:-)

[Chibs]

I might look into some of the higher end Hoyas if you guys have had good luck and no ill effects.
Hoya is fine, it is only the really low quality UV filters that will result in quality loss or reflections. Hoya is however not high end, but more the middle ground. High end filters made by B+W and Heliopan are among the best.



Actually pro still photographers, especially out in the field have been using UV filters as a protective measure for half a century which I believe predates video production by a long run.
Do remember that half a century ago, UV filters were more important as they also had the benefit of cutting away quite some haze and filter out UV light, which is less of a problem with digital.

[J Davis]

UV filters are for film, not needed for digital sensors. Good if you are throwing blood around in a gore scene tho

[Martti Ekstrand]

Do remember that half a century ago, UV filters were more important as they also had the benefit of cutting away quite some haze and filter out UV light
My memory is a tad hazy nowadays but I have faint recollections of nearly getting kicked off of a nice summer job back in '77 for forgetting to replace the UV filter on one lens after a clean up of the entire lens collection. When I pointed out to my boss photographer that we were doing a indoor shoot that day he nearly chewed my head off and said it was supposed to be there to protect the front element no matter what where we were. Ohh, good ol' times.