UV Filter to Protect Lens

Is it common to use a UV filter on a GH1 for video work?

With all my past 35mm cameras I always had a UV filter on the lens to protect it. I purchased some FD lenses recently that came UV filters. Both of these lenses have visible reflections caused by the filters so I removed them.
 
I don't shoot with filters on unless I have to but I don't have a matbox. Also a lot of my lenses I got cheap off of ebay and getting the filters for them wouldn't really be worth it money wise.
 
...I always had a UV filter on the lens to protect it.....Both of these lenses have visible reflections caused by the filters


That's the answer there.

If you're making a movie or something with control over lighting, etc, I wouldn't use a UV filter (unless it's a filter intended for the particular scene).

For event/wedding work, I always use a UV filter, because the lenses/coatings are vulnerable to damage. Cheap filters cause major flares. I use B+W MRC 010 UV filters on all my lenses, which don't flare so bad. All the Tiffen UV filters I've bought, however, suck big time when it comes to flare/image degradation.

If it's a cheap FD lens, I probably wouldn't worry about protecting the lens so much, as a B+W might cost more than the lens itself. But if it's a brand new MFT lens that costs more than the camera...I'd put a good UV filter on it...if anything just to protect the resale value! I can easily see all my expensive MFT lenses being on eBay in a year or two...so I want to keep them mint!

Good luck!
 
swvzlstyx,

If you have the stock 14-140 lens does the B+W MRC 010 UV filter cause any vignetting? There are many variations of the filter you described. Could you tell me which one it is on this page?
 
Last edited:
I never shoot with filters unless I need an effect, pola or grad filter for the shot, and that includes my $35K Canon HD lens. UV filters just seem to catch flare. If I'm filming welding or a helicopter landing, well that's different...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top