Are protective front filters necessary?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

JoelKlein

JoelKlein

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
I started asking in the 400/4.5 thread. But I really want to dive in in this again.

I’m referring to the expensive quality ones.

Pro’s
1. It protects the lens should the lens fall.

2. It protects from UV & Haze.

Con’s
1. Its might interfere with the lens design and front element coating.

2. May rob some equity.

What’s your opinion?
 
Member's gallery
Coke vs. Pepsi, Ford vs. Chevy. This question usually ends up the same - a lot of strong opinions on both sides of the table. One thing to keep in mind is that having a filter allows you to remove it as desired. And for the record, I typically have B+W filters on my lenses as I used to photograph kids, often with hands covered in food. And as I live on the coast, I am sometimes near the ocean spray, and I'd rather have a filter take any crud than my front element. But front elements are quite tough these days, and filters can sometimes cause flare or a slight loss of sharpness. So if you think that a lens hood is not sufficient for the level of protection you want, a filter is a good option, emphasis on the word "option" since it can be removed.

Good luck,

--Ken
 
Member's gallery
I don't know, but I don't use it in the studio and I always use it outdoors (invariably tropical beach).

Also, since much of my outdoors work is daytime video, there is no way to shoot it WITHOUT an ND filter.

And a hood.
 
Member's gallery
Depending where I am dictates when I use them. If hiking thru the woods I use them, out in the open off. I've been in several camera shops where they have a lens or two that have trier front lens cracked. Have a protective screen on your cell phone, same applies.
 
The second pro is not a pro. Digital sensors are not sensitive to UV so no help with haze. The best filters transmit more than 99.5% if there is no glare, so if you don't mind to lose a half percent then no problem.
 
Member's gallery
txstone said:
Just ran across this Jan Wegener video again this afternoon
I frequently use a lens hood and haven’t (so far) damaged a front element..
Click to expand...
IMO, this is why people think filters are bad. Incredibly poor testing. Hopefully most people would know that you don't test for this sort of thing on moving subjects.
 
Member's gallery
For impact protection, they don't do much, they are much more delicate than a front element. However, as I mention in the video, there are times you may want one, especially dusty, sandy environments or when facing ocean spray. It's rare for me to use them, I have to know I'm going into a hazardous situation that would actually damage my front element. I don't keep them on the lens on a "just in case" basis.
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
For impact protection, they don't do much, they are much more delicate than a front element. However, as I mention in the video, there are times you may want one, especially dusty, sandy environments or when facing ocean spray. It's rare for me to use them, I have to know I'm going into a hazardous situation that would actually damage my front element. I don't keep them on the lens on a "just in case" basis.
Click to expand...
So does this mean you drink Coke or Pepsi?🤔

--Ken
 
Member's gallery
I generally don’t use them and don’t have any that will fit above 77mm. I will put one on if i’m shooting something or somewhere that will likely get the front of the lens dirty. Times when something is likely to splash or a dog might lick the front of the lens or maybe in a really dusty environment. I had a B+W on a 24-70mm F/2.8L while on a mountain bike and crashed. The lens hit the ground and dented ring on the filter. I had to take the lens into a shop to get the filter removed but nothing broke. Still used the filter afterwards. I don’t think there would have been any issue without the filter either so I haven’t bought any since.
 
Member's gallery
I’m 90% made up to break that habit.
I don’t have it on a number of new primes I bought, including the 50/1.2 14-25/2.8 and 800pf
So… only the 24-70 70-200 f/2.8 has them… time to unscrew them and with a broken heart do what? Send them to B&H like I’m doing with the 95mm?
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
For impact protection, they don't do much, they are much more delicate than a front element. However, as I mention in the video, there are times you may want one, especially dusty, sandy environments or when facing ocean spray. It's rare for me to use them, I have to know I'm going into a hazardous situation that would actually damage my front element. I don't keep them on the lens on a "just in case" basis
Click to expand...
What about the use of polarizer lenses or other specialty filters?
 
Member's gallery
If I need a PL filter because a kid is wearing eye glasses, then I have no choice and I use it, but I use the Nikon brand to ensure best quality
 
Member's gallery
I went from the filters on everything camp to use as required for a few reasons.
I got tired of screwing a filter off just to put another one on.
I have had one corrode at the threads and became very hard to remove.
I treat the UV / clear filters like you would a pair of safety glasses..... put them on when you need them.
For polarisers and ND’s etc.... just use what I need for the shot.
I find in most cases the lens hood affords more than enough protection.
 
Member's gallery
I don't use them anymore since I had a strange experience with a protective filter.
It created weird lines in the near bokeh, meaning the slightly defocused regions showed parallel lines as if you shot through a fence or something.
It drove me crazy because I thought it was the lens until it turned out to be the filter.

Instead, I always have the lens hood on.

Ok, you said you are referring to the pro ones and that one was certainly not a pro grade filter.
However, I am almost sure it was written something like "pro" on the package (of course...).

For UV protection, filters are meaningless, since any lens absorbs more than enough UV itself.

I find them to be useful when it comes to cleaning: It is much easier and safer to clean a filter than a front element.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I live within a few miles of the ocean, so I have a high quality filter on every lens that has filter threads - to protect against salt spray and blowing sand. However, I use my lens hoods always, to protect against branches, bumps, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top