I need advice on getting lens protective filters

[Vincent_VdB]

Steve on the subject...........

All About UV Filters - Backcountry Gallery

UV filters – do you need them or not? It’s a question that comes up all the time in photography circles with usually about half the people thinking they need UV filters and the other half thinking the fist half is crazy! So, what’s the truth? To find out, I put everything to the test […]

backcountrygallery.com

Indeed but fair to say that 9 years since the video and article was made a lot has changed to the pro protection filters, the top Hoya filters have today just very state-of-the-art coatings. And yes, in the end there will always be a pro and a con to it.

 

[Nimi]

https://www.vadzoimaging.com/post/which-lens-is-best-for-your-needs

May be it will be help for your question

Clickbait. Don't click.

 

[ScubaChuck]

Thanks, Nimi

 

[PhilcTx]

Have been to Florida several times and found no obvious need for a protective lens filter on the "Nature Coast".

However - on one outing to Clearwater Beach our Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 "L" lens ( a Canon weather-protected lens but w. no protective lens filter ) was accidentally dropped onto dry beach sand. Oops.

After quickly picking it up there was noted some slight "grinding" of the lens when trying to zoom with it. The lens required a trip to back to Canon for CLA and was fine afterwards.

No lens filter would help when dropping lens onto dry sand.

 

[ScubaChuck]

I’m just a suspenders belt kind of guy.

 

[bleirer]

I'd challenge anyone, assuming that direct glare is not happening, to post 10 pairs of identical shots one with and one without and see how well folks can tell them apart.

 

[Lee R]

I don’t use filters for lens protection but rather ease of cleaning if it’s a dusty/sandy or spray environment. That way I can just go for it with a lens brush and lens wipes and not really worry much if i degrade a lens filter. Otherwise it’s a more meticulous approach to an actual lens element.

I’m not convinced they help much for impacts, also not really convinced the image quality hit on using them is much to worry about either.

They seem lIke (the clear/uv ones) more of a convienience item for me for quick worry free clearing of the lens. This happens more for me with smaller primes and whatnot than the large lenses where I’m generally not hiking all around with those as much and I use filters on the small lenses, but not the large lenses.

 

[ScubaChuck]

I basically want the ease of cleaning.

 

[Archibald]

I'd challenge anyone, assuming that direct glare is not happening, to post 10 pairs of identical shots one with and one without and see how well folks can tell them apart.

People can't tell when you shoot through window glass either... so what does that say about the cost of those expensive tiny bits of round glass?

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Shot through thick window glass at Parc Omega, QC.

 

[RAWky]

It's easier for me to remove dust and potential water splashes from the flat surface of an Nikon-NC filter (I have one on each of my lenses) than from the grooves, joints and crevices of the front lens mount.

 

[David Berry]

I basically want the ease of cleaning.

And if ‘things go wrong’ (aka scratching), all that has happened is that an ‘uncheap’ non-UV filter has been damaged.

 

[wotan1]

I had one incident long ago when my 70-200mm rolled off a chair onto concrete. I had a protective filter on the lens, it cracked and had to be removed in pieces. I later took the lens in to have the filter ring removed, it cost me all of $10 to fix. The lens had some rough edges around the filter thread but was otherwise undamaged. I could have paid to have the filter ring replaced but chose to leave things alone.

At the time that happened the lens hood was not on the lens.

Based on various studies I have read about the effectiveness of protective filters I no longer use them. The amount of money spent on protective filters is out of proportion to their value.

To me good quality lens caps and especially hoods are much more protective.

My most vulnerable lens is probably the 800mm f6.3 pf. It has a very large front element that is both very prominent and very vulnerable. The lens comes with a very effective protective case which includes a large padded leather like front cover. I found the Zemlin lens cap to be a valuable protective addition. The cap is substantial and highly protective. It holds securely. I also always keep the lens hood in place and I recently added the two-piece Zemlin hood.