Can of worms - protective filter

[grahamc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, DOJ said:

I never use lens filters. My lens elements (on most of my lenses) are always so recessed and small. But i am thinking of buying one for my Summicron because I have scheduled trips where I will go to the beach and its windy and i don’t want to sand blast my lens.

When I’m not using the camera i use a lens cap and the camera is in a pouch. If you don’t use caps or keep the camera somewhere when not in use then I would just put a clear filter on it all the time. The exception would be a lens like the 50mm APO-Lanthar. I was seriously considering buying a filter for that lens when I had it. The elements (both rear and front) go all the way to the rim. The lens is packed with glass and on my very first day out a little schmootz from a tree landed right on the front element just me walking.  It will get dirty all the time. It’s like you can’t avoid touching it or stuff landing on it. My Summicron hardly gets dirty except for a bit of dust i just blow away because the lens is so recessed. So depends on the lens too.

I clean my lenses rarely but when i do i use a blower and a LENSPEN and i clean it very lightly. I dont wipe a cloth on the whole thing. I just remove the fingerprint or spot with the carbon tip of the LENSPEN. I blow air and brush before I do it.

I just checked it with the magnifier lamp (which BTW it’s a must for cleaning the sensor. The second smaller magnifier shows you everything. You can see every little thing on the sensor)). It’s mostly loose dust. And of course it has a built-in hood and I do pull it out if I feel light rain pass by or if I feel I need to protect the lens.

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!

So here’s the question. UV-Haze or Clear? Does it make any difference in digital photography? Mine of course is 39mm.

I think using a protective filter in beach or ocean-side environments is a must. I use a filter on all my lenses and sometimes after walking around the coast (not necessarily on the sand) there is a noticeable film that has settled on the filter from the ocean air.  I wouldn’t want to be cleaning the actual glass front element so often as is needed, especially old lenses  

I’m happy to wipe the attached filters with almost anything as long as it does the job (breath and front of my t shirt is fine for me). It means I don’t need lens caps and I never have to clean (or worry about) the actual glass.  

To your point about sand storms, it a reality - I had a filter fall off, after which the wind unluckily picked up and I have a small chip on the front element of the lens I was using at the time as I was in a partially woody coastal area and lots of debris in the wind .  
 

Regarding UV or not, I don’t think you ‘need’ UV for digital photography but they are the most widely available so I just use those anyway especially as i shoot film and digital. . Other members will know more 
 

Edited January 15, 2023 by grahamc

[Advertisement]

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

[shirubadanieru]

I use filters with all my lenses, especially old lenses. I definitely do not want to clean the front element of any leica vintage lens, as it’s so easy to scratch them. With a filter I have zero worries about fingerprints, dust, etc. That also makes me never really use a cap & be ready to shoot at all times.

The only lens I can’t find a filter for is the Hektor 2.8cm f6.3 because it’s not the regular A19 as the elmars are…if anyone knows what size it is let me know ahah maybe A19.5 or A20?!

Anyway, my advice is …always a filter in front of your lens if they are vintage and/or expensive Leica lenses.

[Erato]

3 minutes ago, shirubadanieru said:

I use filters with all my lenses, especially old lenses. I definitely do not want to clean the front element of any leica vintage lens, as it’s so easy to scratch them. With a filter I have zero worries about fingerprints, dust, etc. That also makes me never really use a cap & be ready to shoot at all times.

The only lens I can’t find a filter for is the Hektor 2.8cm f6.3 because it’s not the regular A19 as the elmars are…if anyone knows what size it is let me know ahah maybe A19.5 or A20?!

Anyway, my advice is …always a filter in front of your lens if they are vintage and/or expensive Leica lenses.

Filter type - A 36 slip-on or 34 mm screw-in filter

[shirubadanieru]

12 minutes ago, Erato said:

Filter type - A 36 slip-on or 34 mm screw-in filter

Oh 34mm!! Same as summaron then!? Had no idea. Will give it a try : ) 

[Kiwimac]

Other than to achieve effects, I’ve never put a filter on a lens in 40 years. 
 

Neither have I ever put a screen protector on a camera. 

[henning]

In the 80's I once took a bin of filters(used, and with permission :-)) home from a camera store and tested them for quality. Mainly for planar parallelism and to a small degree, reflections. As expected, filter with poor or no coatings, which were quite common in that batch of about 50, caused extra flare and reflections to some degree or other. The surprising thing was that in that batch over 50% of the filters did not have perfectly parallel surfaces. This is fairly easy to check by putting them on a dark surface and shining a small or point source at the from about 45 degrees and turning them while watching the reflection. If the reflections from the front and the back surfaces move with respect to each other, the surfaces are not parallel. Those filter should be tossed out immediately. The worst ones were naturally older ones and Tiffen and Harrison & Harrison were the worst. I don't think any of the latter passed. Fortunately the company seems to have gone but they did supply many movie companies.

Very wide angle and long telephoto lenses fared the worst with bad filters, while 50-90mm lenses weren't affected too much. That applies both to filters with poor coatings and to ones with geometric problems.

Current filters are a lot better, and I rarely see bad filters, but I have come across some in the last 10 years. Watch out.

In practice I use lens hoods but no filters, unless for a specific reason. Extra dusty, sandy, salty or other airborne environmental conditions always need filters, an of course occasional CPL, ND and such get used as well.

At present one of the cameras I have is the M10M, and I find that the spectral response is very close to that of Tri-X with a medium yellow filter, so I usually don't use a filter on that camera. Only orange, red and sometimes yellow-green.

I have been shooting since the 50's and Leicas since the 60's. Lots of other systems and formats and professionally. I have never damaged a front element in any way.

Edited January 16, 2023 by henning

[hirohhhh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 7/13/2022 at 3:03 PM, pippy said:

Outdoors I always have a filter mounted. Always. It's a point which is not even remotely up for question IMX and IMO.

Indoors in the studio is completely the opposite. I never use a filter in such a situation.

Philip.

 

Philip, as someone who always has a protective filter mounted on almost all lenses, I'm curious why you take them off indoors? Did you notice a decrease in image quality or why are you so strict about never having it indoors? For me is, I just put it and forget it. I only take them down if I want to mount some other filter, which is rarely in my case.

Edited January 16, 2023 by hirohhhh

[Guest]

6 hours ago, henning said:

In the 80's I once took a bin of filters(used, and with permission :-)) home from a camera store and tested them for quality. Mainly for planar parallelism and to a small degree, reflections. As expected, filter with poor or no coatings, which were quite common in that batch of about 50, caused extra flare and reflections to some degree or other. The surprising thing was that in that batch over 50% of the filters did not have perfectly parallel surfaces. This is fairly easy to check by putting them on a dark surface and shining a small or point source at the from about 45 degrees and turning them while watching the reflection. If the reflections from the front and the back surfaces move with respect to each other, the surfaces are not parallel. Those filter should be tossed out immediately. The worst ones were naturally older ones and Tiffen and Harrison & Harrison were the worst. I don't think any of the latter passed. Fortunately the company seems to have gone but they did supply many movie companies.

Very wide angle and long telephoto lenses fared the worst with bad filters, while 50-90mm lenses weren't affected too much. That applies both to filters with poor coatings and to ones with geometric problems.

Current filters are a lot better, and I rarely see bad filters, but I have come across some in the last 10 years. Watch out.

In practice I use lens hoods but no filters, unless for a specific reason. Extra dusty, sandy, salty or other airborne environmental conditions always need filters, an of course occasional CPL, ND and such get used as well.

At present one of the cameras I have is the M10M, and I find that the spectral response is very close to that of Tri-X with a medium yellow filter, so I usually don't use a filter on that camera. Only orange, red and sometimes yellow-green.

I have been shooting since the 50's and Leicas since the 60's. Lots of other systems and formats and professionally. I have never damaged a front element in any way.

Interesting, didn’t know the M10M spectral response is indeed close to tri-x with medium yellow filter. Good to know. Love my M10M. 😊

[pippy]

7 hours ago, hirohhhh said:

Philip, as someone who always has a protective filter mounted on almost all lenses, I'm curious why you take them off indoors? Did you notice a decrease in image quality or why are you so strict about never having it indoors?...

My answer which you quote was, for the sake of brevity, brief but, as I now realise, it left out an important piece of information.

I don't take filters off when indoors if I'm taking happy-snaps; I was actually referring to my Pro work. Most of the latter involves small(-ish) scale studio-shot subject matter and the nature of the vast majority of the artifacts requires careful back-lighting from both right and left sides of subject with my light-sources only marginally outside the picture area.

Once or twice in the dim and distant past when I had a filter in place I noticed that I was getting some IQ issues through either flare or else secondary reflections as it was not always possible to flag-off the light sources from hitting the front of the lens completely. On removing the filter this tendency was reduced (if not entirely eliminated).

Since that discovery I always use my lenses 'naked' simply to reduce the possibility of reflections to the minimum.

Hope that helps?

Philip.

[williamj]

Test your images to see whether you can detect the presence of a filter. If you can't see them then you're golden.

I always have either a UV or a Yellow filter attached. I've tested whether the filter degrades the image and in my system it does not. There may be more flare if you're pointing towards but not directly at the sun especially if the front element is recessed but a lens hood will cure that.

[ianforber]

I still haven’t decided what to do with filters. Back in the days of film photography I didn’t put filters on any of my lenses and they’re still ok after 30 years use. I started putting filters on lenses when I started buying expensive lenses. Currently, I have a filter on my Q2 because it’s fixed lens and damaging it would be a faff. Some situations (eg shooting street scenes at night with bright specular highlights) have required me to remove the filter to prevent reflections. When I got my 50mm Summicron, I used a B+W uv filter but didn’t get on with for some reason, probably because the Leica lens cap didn’t fit as well and using a 3rd party cheap cap was even worse. So I just use it with no filter now, although I would definitely put it back on if I was going to a dirty/dusty environment.

[pgk]

On 1/15/2023 at 1:42 AM, grahamc said:

I’m happy to wipe the attached filters with almost anything as long as it does the job (breath and front of my t shirt is fine for me).

I've always assumed that this is why press photographers used to wear ties.

[Nilei]

I don't use filters. I've been shooting for 30 years and I've never scratched a front lens. High-quality filters are expensive, if one day I should scratch a front lens I will use the money saved here for this.

[luetz]

1 hour ago, Nilei said:

I don't use filters. I've been shooting for 30 years and I've never scratched a front lens. High-quality filters are expensive, if one day I should scratch a front lens I will use the money saved here for this.

If it's a Q2 it would require a lot of saving to replace the lens, probably 80 % of the cost of the camera.  A one-time purchase of a Leica original protective filter is $130.00 US.

[logan2z]

I used to be filter-phobic - I figured why put an $80 filter on a multi-thousand dollar lens?  But I shoot B&W film exclusively and often use a yellow filter - so often, in fact, that I just keep one attached to all my lenses all the time.  You know what?  I haven't noticed any degradation in image quality since using a high-quality B+W filter, and I have peace of mind knowing that the front element of my expensive lens is protected.  It's cheap insurance.

[Stonewall Brigade]

I can recommend the excellent Hoya NXT Plus UV filter, made with Schott glass. I paid around around $30 which is comparable in price to the B+W #10 MRC Master filter.