Silly filter Question...

[bherman01545]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For years, I have used a B+W MRC UV XS-Nano filter on all of my Digital lenses. I believe that I've heard that digital sensors don't necessarily benefit from a UV filter (as opposed to a multi-coated clear filter) 

Assuming that you use filters at all, do you use a UV, Skylight or Clear?

Thanks!

-Brad

[darylgo]

I use all three on my lenses, some are older non multicoated.   Filter manufacturers release new and improved versions quite frequently but I find there isn't much difference among the three you list or the different iterations of multi-coated or for that matter single coated.   Theory suggests differently on occasion but I find on a practical basis images don't always follow theoretical.  Roger Cicala at Lens Rentals has some interesting blog posts on filters:  https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/06/the-comprehensive-ranking-of-the-major-uv-filters-on-the-market/ , the take away is that filters can turn into a big mess of a what's what but fortunately they just don't make a big difference imagewise.   BTW- the very expensive Leica filters are at the top of the list in Roger's evaluation.  

[Jeff S]

5 hours ago, darylgo said:

 Roger Cicala at Lens Rentals has some interesting blog posts on filters:  https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/06/the-comprehensive-ranking-of-the-major-uv-filters-on-the-market/ , the take away is that filters can turn into a big mess of a what's what but fortunately they just don't make a big difference imagewise.   BTW- the very expensive Leica filters are at the top of the list in Roger's evaluation.  

And my favorite article on filters by Roger...

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/good-times-with-bad-filters/

Jeff

[AZN]

FWIW I use UV filters to physically protect the lens front element.  Keep the dust, mud, salt spray etc. off.

Although I too used B+W filters, have found the "PowerUV" filters by Aurora Aperture to be equally good and (it is claimed) they are pretty tough:

http://aurora-aperture.com/2016/11/22/poweruv/

AZN

[michali]

Here's why I've always used filters (B+W) on all of my lenses. A lovely deep gouge which would have been on the front lens element......

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2019 by michali

[cbarber]

I personally do not use any filters in front of my lens to protect the front element. To me they are more of a nuisance and just not my preference. It's a personal thing. I did use UV and Skylight filters on and off in the 70's and early 80's (a long time ago now!).

I can't really add to this conversation but to say I have used filters from several manufacturers over the years and my preference today are 'Breakthrough Filters'. For one thing, I find the ND filters much more neutral than the B&W and Lee filters I used to use.

[cbarber]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, michali said:

Here's why I've always used filters (B+W) on all of my lenses. A lovely deep gouge which would have been on the front lens element......

 

I forgot to mention. Good thing you had a filter in front of your lens Mike!! It made me pause for a second or two, and a smart person would probably use a filter. But I am stubborn in my ways and will not put a filter on to protect a lens. I am not saying my way is the right way. 😀
 

[darylgo]

Today I tested some lenses, one has a Leica UV/IR filter and the other a Leica UVa II.   The latter reflects less light at 0.1% than any filter according to Roger Cicala at Lens Rentals.  I tested the lenses primarily for their IQ but I also tested them with their respective filters vs. no filter.  The result was I could see no difference in the images with a filter and without.  My preference currently is to use Leica filters when possible, B+W doesn't give up much to Leica if any at all.  I am a bit leary of all the new filters coming onto to the market that don't have the longevity yet to cement their reputation for quality, I don't doubt the qualities they market and the Breakthrough filter I have is beautifully made.  Heliopan and Formatt-Hitech are lesser known in the US but also good.  

[wlaidlaw]

The worst filters of all in my experience were the UV/IR Leica filters, we needed to use on the M8 to get true colours. They were very prone to causing image ghosting with pink circles in the sky or especially when used indoors with artificial lighting. I prefer not to use filters but for daylight when travelling, I often leave a B+W Käsemann Polarising filter on my SL  and CL lenses. Other than when trying to cut down spurious reflections off water, I find you don't really need to twiddle these filters and can leave them at the midday position all day. I only use filters on my M and LTM lenses on film, especially B&W, where I leave a yellow filter on most of the time other than indoors. 

Wilson

[Jared]

Personally, I don’t use protective filters on my cameras.  Here are some things to know:

1) UV is simply not needed with digital capture.  A skylight filter can still add a slight warming effect, but only if you don’t have “auto white balance” enabled since AWB will adjust to cancel out the additional warmth. Basically, you can use all three filter types as additional lens protection.

2) Back when lenses were single coated with magnesium fluoride a protective filter made a lot of sense.  The anti reflective coating was extremely fragile, and even the act of cleaning a lens could easily scratch it.  That’s when filters as lens protection really caught on—and rightly so.  Modern multi coatings are not fragile at all.  In fact, they are more scratch resistant than crown glass.  As long as you aren’t grinding sand and dirt into them they will do fine even under harsh conditions.  Can they be scratched?  Yes.  Is it common? No.  Would a UV filter protect against scratches in a harsh environment? Yes, but it may not be necessary, even in a harsh environment.  There is no question filters will add a layer of protection against impact, scrapes, dirt, and grime.  The protection against dirt and grime is really no longer necessary since you can clean the lens as easily as cleaning the filter, but the protection against impact and scrapes is real.  A lens shade would offer similar protection as well as reducing the likelihood of lens flare, but it is comparatively bulky.

3) Good quality filters have no discernible effect on image quality most of the time. The problem with that sentence is “most of the time”.  If the light is at just the wrong angle filters will add to flare and flare.  Here is a simple way to prove it to yourself:  take a picture of a light chandelier or Christmas tree lights or similar light source.  Do it with the filter on and with it off.  Expose normally, not for the bright point sources.  You will find halos around the lights with the filter that aren’t there without the filter.  The problem is that the filter is flat (not curved like a lens).  Flat elements, unless you can get the transmission to 100% from all angles, will add to stray reflections and glare.  Would you notice it most of the time?  No.  A very low percentage of shots will have point light sources or will have light at just the right angle to cause an issue.  But it won’t be zero percent.  

I’d rather put on a lens hood in situations where the lens might get bumped or scraped.  But a reasonable person could make the opposite decision—avoid the bulk of a lens hood and still gain protection against scrapes and scratches.  The only argument that doesn’t really hold water any more is the “protection from dirt and grime” argument.  Modern lenses don’t need it or benefit from it.  You’re not going to scratch your modern lens by cleaning it as long as you take very basic precautions.