UV Filter for M lenses

[hirohhhh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I read in the FAQ section by @jaapv that "There is no need for an UV filter on Leica M lenses, as they are UV filtered from the factory", but I'm wondering if anyone is using them as a protective filters? I have one attached to each of my SL lenses, and I'm glad my glasses are like new after several years thanks to those filters. Also, I used quality filters, so I didn't notice drop in the image quality. Is this the case with M lenses? Particularly, I have Summilux M 28mm 1.4.

[Advertisement]

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

[Gobert]

If there is no other filter on the lens, such as ND or yellow, there is almost always an UV or protection filter on my lenses.

[Matlock]

I use UV or protection filters and stick to B+W or Heliopan.

[Gobert]

34 minutes ago, Matlock said:

I use UV or protection filters and stick to B+W or Heliopan.

So do I. Only for my Elmarit 24 I have a Leica filter. This was the only filter which didn’t cause problems with the clip-on hood.

[SrMi]

I never put UV or clear filters as protection on any of my lenses, regardless of price. There is always a chance of image quality degradation when adding filters (e.g., flares and ghost images). 
On the other hand, most often, image quality degradation is not noticeable. Also, some may have peace of mind because the front lens is protected by another layer of glass.

Edited September 26, 2021 by SrMi

[pgk]

17 hours ago, hirohhhh said:

..... I'm wondering if anyone is using them as a protective filters?

Yes. And I had a lens with badly damaged coating which affected performance. You can always take a filter off to avoid any degredation (usually reflections) but you can't put one on to avoid damage after the event. Its a no-brainer.

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm another who always uses a filter when shooting outdoors. Always.

I know there could / should be, in theory, some degradation in IQ but having done tests in the studio the reality, IMX, is that there is no noticeable difference so for me, as Paul said above, it's also a no-brainer.

Shooting in the studio, however, I don't use them but that's because the circumstances are very different.

Philip.

Edited September 26, 2021 by pippy

[MarkP]

+1

[Gobert]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

I'm another who always uses a filter when shooting outdoors. Always.

I know there could / should be, in theory, some degradation in IQ but having done tests in the studio the reality, IMX, is that there is no noticeable difference so for me, as Paul said above, it's also a no-brainer.

Shooting in the studio, however, I don't use them but that's because the circumstances are very different.

Philip.

Shooting in de studio is different and sharp evening lights might be something to take into account. You might create a ghost….

[Narsuitus]

The filter shown here did not survive the fall on concrete – the camera and lens did.

It is debatable as to whether the filter protected the lens or was the filter the weakest of the three.

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!

[LBJ2]

On 9/25/2021 at 1:29 PM, hirohhhh said:

I read in the FAQ section by @jaapv that "There is no need for an UV filter on Leica M lenses, as they are UV filtered from the factory", but I'm wondering if anyone is using them as a protective filters? I have one attached to each of my SL lenses, and I'm glad my glasses are like new after several years thanks to those filters. Also, I used quality filters, so I didn't notice drop in the image quality. Is this the case with M lenses? Particularly, I have Summilux M 28mm 1.4.

I wouldn't worry about it either way. Just something else to spend your money on and looks like you already spent. I do use a UV filter as a front element protective filter when I don't think the already very effective lens hood is enough e.g., against ocean sea spray and when I am shooting on the motocross track with dirt, mud and sand flying every which way. You know when you can hear the grit in your teeth scenarios. Otherwise I consider the UV filter a foreign element that is not part of the original lens design. Why wear a raincoat when it's not raining. 

Edited September 27, 2021 by LBJ2

[hirohhhh]

2 hours ago, LBJ2 said:

I wouldn't worry about it either way. Just something else to spend your money on and looks like you already spent. I do use a UV filter as a front element protective filter when I don't think the already very effective lens hood is enough e.g., against ocean sea spray and when I am shooting on the motocross track with dirt, mud and sand flying every which way. You know when you can hear the grit in your teeth scenarios. Otherwise I consider the UV filter a foreign element that is not part of the original lens design. Why wear a raincoat when it's not raining. 

Speaking of the ocean spray, I just returned from the beach and it was fairly windy. My lens had quite a few particles and the lens hood was also full of sand dust. Baptism of fire for my new 28mm Summilux.

[Dennis]

The eternal question: filter or no filter! I don't use any kind of filter on my lenses. I never did, but I use a lens hood instead for protection. If possible, all lenses go out of the house with a hood attached (also because it's easier to put it in the bag and not worry about scratching the first glass element. Cause I don't use a lens cap either.

But... for example, if I shoot w/ the 35 Cron Asph I, and I take off the hood, wow. There is no VF blockage, and the 35mm FL is a joy to frame with. It gives me the (false) impression I have a more significant VF magnification. So, I want to try to shoot with a protection filter on, but with no hood. To have more "freedom" and less Iq worry.

I was thinking this: https://breakthrough.photography/products/x4-uv?variant=31478832593 They were expensive, but I read a lot, and they were really worth it. This would be my primary choice.

18 hours ago, pippy said:

I'm another who always uses a filter when shooting outdoors. Always.

I know there could / should be, in theory, some degradation in IQ but having done tests in the studio the reality, IMX, is that there is no noticeable difference so for me, as Paul said above, it's also a no-brainer.

No experience with filters, but I think you resume it wisely. One can shoot all day long with the filter and not notice any IQ degradation. Agree, especially with nowadays modern glasses and coatings. Maybe it's about common sense. People can leave the filter on all day long until they are shooting against the sun or in difficult night situations; well, maybe it's time to remove the filter for a while. Just saying.

.

Big advantage of filters? First element protected, smaller package, and no VF blockage, which I think is critical.

Edited September 27, 2021 by Dennis

[pippy]

3 hours ago, Dennis said:

...I was thinking this: https://breakthrough.photography/products/x4-uv?variant=31478832593 They were expensive, but I read a lot, and they were really worth it. This would be my primary choice...

That does look like a good product, Dennis, and the price seems very reasonable if it lasts a lifetime and really just a drop in the ocean when compared with the price of Leica lenses. Pity it's not available in 41mm diameter...

Philip.

[LeicaR10]

Hirohhhh,   Good to see you are out shooting your new 28 Lux.  The only time I use filters are either when I am at the ocean or near waterfalls with lots of spray or mist.  Other than using either Leica UVA, orange for the M10-M or Breakthrough Photography Neutral Density filters, I do not use a filter.  Everyone has different experiences with filters.  I do know quality does play a factor when it comes to filters.  r/ Mark

[KFo]

If I don’t have a hood, I put a filter on unless it’s a heavily recessed front element like the 28 Summaron.  I use them for physical protection, not image refinement.  I was so happy to go digital and get rid of a big pile of filters.  Now it’s just a few UV filters.

[Mute-on]

24 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

@hirohhhh "I'm wondering if anyone is using them as a protective filters?"

A protective/UV filter of high quality on every lens!!! Easier and way cooler to clean the filter from daily smudges, droplets and incidental fingerprints than the front of a $6000 lens. Sometimes - upon the fall - it can even take the impact instead of the lens. Happened to me at least twice (See an example in post #10).

Unless you are doing scientific tests of the lenses in flaring conditions you will 99.9997% NOT notice any  "degradation" in image quality with high quality filters - take my advice as a professional photographer constantly in the field 😉

Precisely.

Just use a clear protection filter, such as this https://heliopan.com/collections/general-use-filters/products/protection-sh-pmc-filter?variant=12657389764671

[Photoworks]

Leica does not recommend filter on the Noctilux lens as internal reflection in possible. I have a quality ND filter on it since the M camera does not shoot quick enough to get a normal exposure.

I have had issues with a variety of filters that creates goest images on sunset, blight led lights and night photos. Get a quality filter to reduce it..

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[bherman01545]

I always use a filter - B+W, Heliopan or Leica, (Multicoated, MRC, SH-PMC, etc.) and a lens shade. When shooting, I leave the lens cap in the bottom of my bag.

Never had any issues with flare, etc.

-Brad

[pgk]

On 9/26/2021 at 10:27 PM, Narsuitus said:

The filter shown here did not survive the fall on concrete – the camera and lens did.

It is debatable as to whether the filter protected the lens or was the filter the weakest of the three.

Brass filter rims will deform on impact so it will be the weakest of the three and effectively so. I have lost two filters to similar incidents whilst in one the lens needed repair (tightened focus) in the other there as no damage except to the filter rim.

I defy anyone to illustrate the difference on photos using a lens with or without filters (using a 'decent' filter not some thickish bit of glass or cheap plastic one) in any siuation where reflections are not happening. Being right in front of the lens means that the filter itself is way out of focus and any degradation due the refraction through the periphery of the filter is absolutely minimal. I always use a filter purely as protection and often have to remove marks from stuff which would otherwise have ended up on the lens.