Should I use a UV filter on my S2

[jcrutcher]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello, I just purchased a new S2-P and a couple of lenses. I have shot mostly Leica M's and about 1/2 the time I use a UV filter more to protect the glass. With the S lenses have large hoods is this necessary? Thank you for any help you can give.

 

Jim

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[earleygallery]

It's purely personal preference - if I had an S I'd use a protector filter (you don't need a UV one).

[pico]

I would not use so-called protective filters.

Why pay so much money for lenses designed not to use them?

[peterv]

I guess it's personal preference. Some lenses may in some situations loose some of their brilliance with a UV filter attached, but I'm willing to take a small hit (if any) in IQ in return for knowing that such an expensive lens is protected. I use a CZ UV on my 70 mm although it is supposed to already have a protective front element.

 

Some more info here:

 

http://www.reddotforum.com/showthread.php/360-Do-you-use-filters-to-protect-the-front-element

[jip]

So you spend 20+K on a camera and then some on lenses... to get optimum quality and then ruin it with UV filters, camera's are made to be used... not to be protected.

 

The glass is pretty hard these days, I would say NO filter unless you need the effect or something.

 

I have my lenses bare on digital, and usually UV or Yellow filter for film by B+W I have no S2 but M's.

[Alejandro AR]

I do also not use any filters, neither on my M nor S lenses. No issues so far. Too expensive glass to diminish performance by adding additional glass - sounds at first counter intuitive to risk the precious lenses, but you bought them because you wanted to have that top performance...

 

The lens hoods are pretty deep and when I move a lot between taking pictures, I usually put the lens caps on.

 

I still have UV filters on my Nikkors, which I use in more dynamic environments where the risk of damaging something are bigger (and the hoods less sturdy).

 

At the end - as others said - matter of taste and personal risk profile. If you think too much about damaging the lens, put a filter on and you'll feel more comfortable - and may even take the better picture because of not thinking about it any more.

[jcrutcher]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you everyone for taking the time to give me you suggestions. I agree, why take the change of losing the IQ with a filter just because something might happen. No filter for me, in fact I'll remove them from the digital M's also.

 

Thanks again,

Jim

[M9reno]

That there should be some image degradation makes obvious sense, but a different question is: is it actually noticeable? I.e. has anyone tested a Leica lens with and without a top-branded filter to see the difference, and how much of it there is?

[tobey bilek]

If you are a careful person, no.

 

If you don`t know, examine your car finish. Is it full of cleaning or car wash scratches? Do you allow the technicians to use impact wrenches on the wheels? Do you wax it regularly?

[earleygallery]

So by building in a protective filter on the 70mm S lens, Leica have degraded the quality of the lens already??

[albertknappmd]

I have been using an S2 for the past two years and am a big fan of protective UV filters. I also use the Kaeseman circular polars on many occasions.

 

Simply put, the B&W Schott glass protects my front optic against the elements (eg, the Antarctic and the Arctic to name but a few choice places but this is applicable in Paris, Madrid or Delhi!)

 

I know of no rigourous scientific study using quality optics (read Leica or high end Nikon/Canon) and prime filters (eg., B&W, Heliopan etc) that documented any DETECTABLE image degradation. That being said, I would aver that certain situations such as contre jour photography may have a negative impact via increased flare.

 

Sadly, the literature if rife with anecdotes and testimonials decrying the use of filters but, I feel that these should be discounted by anyone who is serious in pursuing the truth.

 

Therefore, until a well designed study confirms image degradation, I feel it is safer and smarter to use the high end filters for protection purposes.

 

Hope this helps!

 

Albert :)

Edited April 10, 2013 by albertknappmd

[albireo_double]

I don't use any protective filters on my M and S lenses but I always use a lens hood, not just to avoid stray light lowering contrast but also to protect the front element from damage, fingerprints etc.

[dfarkas]

You can certainly use protective filters on S lenses without any problems (save the caveat below). I second Albert's suggestion of B+W multi-coated filters, specifically the B+W 007M MRC. My only warning with protective filters is with the 70mm. If you use a filter and no lens shade, you can get some nasty flare due to the fact that the 70's front element is perfectly flat. The two flat pieces of glass can very effectively bounce light around. Use a hood and it's no problem though.

 

The flip side is that all S lenses have a very durable Aqua Dura coating, which is hydrophobic and the lenses are completely weather sealed. I've shot in moderate rain. Others here have shot in snowfall. No filters. No problem.

[Jack MacDonough]

I do not use protective filters. The lens shade is more protective for me.

Besides the lens coating is hydrophobic, and some filters are not.

 

I have used the lenses in the equivalent of driving rain, i.e. waves of water while photographing sailing boats at speed. No problem.

 

Again, the lens shade provides better protection from hard knocks than any glass

[JerryYordy]

I'm willing to accept the 70mm lens has adequate protection from rain, snow, and other water, but what about sand? I was out shooting last week and it was gusty. On more than one occasion sand was blown around quite strongly. Can the front element get scratched or the coating abraded by blowing sand?

[dkCambridgeshire]

A lens protector or UV filter makes sense if the camera is used in a dusty atmosphere but otherwise the hood should be sufficient.

 

dunk

[Alberti]

I remember Chris W. Broere [Plaudereien über Leica Technik] once wrote that Leica lenses are made using Canada Balsem as the glue between lenses and that has the effect of absorbing UV - for him a reason for the very nice colour rendition.

If this trade secret is still effective, a UV would not have too much effect only in adverse [high altitude..] situations

. . . and for the rest, my own experience is an extra UV filter (even those from Leica) easily smears and smudges, reducing the resolution; at least it is a hard thing to clean.

[dkCambridgeshire]

I remember Chris W. Broere [Plaudereien über Leica Technik] once wrote that Leica lenses are made using Canada Balsem as the glue between lenses and that has the effect of absorbing UV - for him a reason for the very nice colour rendition.

If this trade secret is still effective, a UV would not have too much effect only in adverse [high altitude..] situations

. . . and for the rest, my own experience is an extra UV filter (even those from Leica) easily smears and smudges, reducing the resolution; at least it is a hard thing to clean.

 

Leica stopped using Canada balsam years ago - no lens manufacturer uses it now. The only users now are those technicians and enthusiasts who restore old lenses which have deteriorated because of balsam separation. Modern glass adhesives are 'cured' (set hard) by UV light so they too probably absorb UV wavelengths.

 

dunk

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Blues_junkie]

Agreed; shot in moderate rain without any ill effects whatsoever and the lens hoods protect the front lens element from getting any water droplets on the surface. Not a worry.

[menos I M6]

I am a long time advocate of not using any filter, whenever possible.

For many of my lenses, I practice this, handle them carefully, always use lens hoods and use a professional attitude in regards of cleaning.

 

Lenses, I do use a "protection filter" on are only lenses, which are rare, difficult to replace or repair or known for their very soft glass.

 

When I got more into medium format gear, the cameras and lenses simply are so large, that I started to see one trend for myself:

 

I discard the lens hood (for lenses, that do not necessarily need them to my taste), discard the lens cap and use a filter at all times instead.

I clean the filter with my T-shirt (which I would not even dream of doing with any of my lenses, even the least expensive of them all), do not worry about scratches, when transporting the camera in my bag.

 

I buy only the highest grade B+W filters, to ease with the "why buy expensive glass and slap a filter in front" factor.

 

When shooting in adverse conditions (dirty, wet, …), I always use a filter and a lens hood.

Cleaning water and crud off a plane filter glass (especially the nice MRC coated B+W filters) is A LOT easier, than having to deal with this in the field on the bare lens' front element.