Mental Health and UV Filters

[kivis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have been using UV Filters for over 45 years. It's a mental thing at this point. All I hear is how unnecessary they are for the modern lens. Example, I have a lovely 'Cron 50/2 (5th version).  Without spending $$$ on Shrinks, can you finally talk me out of these little rings of security?🤑

[Advertisement]

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

[pippy]

Nope.

Philip.

[egrossman]

Never used to use UV filters on lenses. Then I scratched the front element of my 50mm APO probably while cleaning it. Now I use UV filters on my M glass.

Erik 

[Capuccino-Muffin]

Magical thinking. A fine B+W filter with its brass ring is exactly what’s missing to the optical construction of any Leica lens. There’s no proper living without a fine B+W filter.

 

 

[Gelatino]

Once I had to remove a filter completely broken after I had fallen on rocs. After that I would not have been able to take pictures with a front lens in the same state as the filter.

In an other occasion I had to wipe the filter every 30sec (during about one hour)  because of rain and  steam .

If you allow me a comparison a filter is like an helmet you wear when climbing or a waxed jacket to go fishing in sea; better to have it when needed but as soon as the situation does not require extra protection you may forget it.

[Gobert]

In have it screwed on the lens whenever possible.

[didier]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So do I. I have virtually no Lens without a filter screwed on it

[Blackdarter]

It's very much a personal preference, there is no real technical reason to fit. However, depending on what you do and where you go, as outlined by others, there are times when they are sensible to fit.  I have always used quality filters to all my lenses and never regretted the choice or suffered for having one fitted...

[pgk]

3 hours ago, kivis said:

All I hear is how unnecessary they are for the modern lens.

You are reading the wrong information. Filters act as protection as has already been said. Despite hard and anti this that ad the other coatings on lenses they can still get damaged or become mucky and can be hard to thoroughly clean. Having smashe a couple of filters I will always use them. The lenses remain unscathed. I've neer seen anything to suggest that a good filter affects the final image inany way whatsoever, including my own observation.

[stephan54]

I do use B&W clear filters instead of UV ones.

[logan2z]

I used to be in the anti-filter camp.  Why put a $30 piece of glass in front of my multi-thousand dollar lens, was the question I always asked myself.  But I finally relented and started using B+W filters on all of my lenses - mostly yellow filters these days since I shoot exclusively in black and white.  No IQ differences that I can detect, so they stay permanently attached for their contrast effects and they protect my lenses at the same time.

[jaeger]

you are right that UV is not necessary anymore, I put them on for dust reason.  Cheap filters create flares or threads stuck... so we are going back to square one.

[Jean-Michel]

Leica filters are not that inexpensive, but way less costly than repairing/replacing a front element. The only lens I do not put a uv filter on is the  90 mm Macro-Elmar, not sure whyI do so, but I find that the deep hood provides adequate protection to the front element.

[spydrxx]

To each his own comfort zone. You' e been doing it successfully for a long time. Why consider changing...doesn't make sense.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Gelatino said:

Once I had to remove a filter completely broken after I had fallen on rocs. After that I would not have been able to take pictures with a front lens in the same state as the filter.

In an other occasion I had to wipe the filter every 30sec (during about one hour)  because of rain and  steam .

If you allow me a comparison a filter is like an helmet you wear when climbing or a waxed jacket to go fishing in sea; better to have it when needed but as soon as the situation does not require extra protection you may forget it.

And I once broke a filter on the Apo-Telyt 280/4.0 R A shard scratched the front lens deeply. - it cost a small fortune to replace.

[jaapv]

26 minutes ago, Jean-Michel said:

Leica filters are not that inexpensive, but way less costly than repairing/replacing a front element. The only lens I do not put a uv filter on is the  90 mm Macro-Elmar, not sure whyI do so, but I find that the deep hood provides adequate protection to the front element.

Leica filters are not quite up to the quality from B+W and Heliopand. - and more expensive.

[Gelatino]

32 minutes ago, jaapv said:

And I once broke a filter on the Apo-Telyt 280/4.0 R A shard scratched the front lens deeply. - it cost a small fortune to replace.

So the filter did not resist to the impact? In what state would have been the unprotected front lens after that impact? OK in that occasion you would have saved the filter value if it haven't been on the lens😜

[Kwesi]

5 hours ago, kivis said:

I have been using UV Filters for over 45 years. It's a mental thing at this point. All I hear is how unnecessary they are for the modern lens. Example, I have a lovely 'Cron 50/2 (5th version).  Without spending $$$ on Shrinks, can you finally talk me out of these little rings of security?🤑

I have B+W clear filters on all my Leica lenses for protection and consistency. for me, the front element is just to precious and vulnerable to not protect.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[egrossman]

47 minutes ago, jaapv said:

And I once broke a filter on the Apo-Telyt 280/4.0 R A shard scratched the front lens deeply. - it cost a small fortune to replace.

I have yet to send the scratched 50mm APO to Leica for repair (it just happened). I shudder at the likely cost. Luckily I have camera insurance that covers accidental damage.

Erik

Edited November 2, 2021 by egrossman

[jaapv]

59 minutes ago, Gelatino said:

So the filter did not resist to the impact? In what state would have been the unprotected front lens after that impact? OK in that occasion you would have saved the filter value if it haven't been on the lens😜

Actually it was a side impact that hit the filter  ring. The front of the lens would have been far more resistant.