Canon UV filters

[Happy_Mummy]

So when I got my camera at Christmas time there were a number of sales, one of which was a camera bag, extra battery and UV filter for $100 which we figured was a great deal since 2 requirements in my mind were the extra battery and a camera bag for all my stuff for now. When we heard that there was the UV filter we weren't really sure what it was for and the person said that it wouldn't affect the photo at all, and would just protect the lens. SInce I have little kids who love to touch everything I thought this would be a great thing to have. That way I didn't have to worry about ruining expensive glass (only kit lenses, but still it would not be easy for us to replace them as money is tight!). ANyways I'm looking at getting another lens and find myself shying away from switching lenses out due to wanting the protection for the lens. I know that I can just switch it out, but that is yet another step to changing the lens that I'm already pushing for time to get the shot with kids! When we looked online it was $27 each. Is this a lot? Are there cheaper ones that can be bought?I believe it is 58mm size. thank you!!!

[RichardTaylor]

Have a look on EBay.

On the Australian EBay the cheap ones are less than the price of a McDonalds meal. (Less than $AU8)

The B&W ones (Arguably one of the best brands) are $AU69 + postage

Keep in mind you get what you pay for.

[Thunder_o_b]

You get what you pay for. A low quality filter regardless of what type it is will negatively affect the IQ. I have UV's on all my lenses simply to protect them. I have spent $40.00 U.S for the smaller ones and over $80.00 U.S for the 78mm ones.

[Happy_Mummy]

ok, now I'm guessing by getting what you pay for either the filter affects the light entering the camera by making it darker, obviously affect photos, or it would scratch easily or both?

[Thunder_o_b]

Originally Posted by Happy_Mummy

ok, now I'm guessing by getting what you pay for either the filter affects the light entering the camera by making it darker, obviously affect photos, or it would scratch easily or both?

The filter is two more air to lens surfaces (unless it is a CP, in which case it is four air to lens surfaces) that now come into play, if these surfaces are not of high quality it won't matter if you have a $3,000.00 L lens behind it as the image is shot before the light even reaches the front element of that high end lens.

UV filters cause no discernible light falloff.

[karen_s]

You do get what you pay for.

I looked into this about a year ago and decided to toss all my cheap UV filters. I ended up buying a B+W Clear filter that works great. If it degrades the image, I can't tell. (I could see image degradation with the cheap ones.)

And I ended up with a clear one rather than a UV. Many of the opinions (online and off) leaned towards the clear. The opinion holders noted most modern lenses already have a UV coating thus making a UV filter unnecessary.

I even dare myself to go filterless at times.

[Thunder_o_b]

Originally Posted by karen_s

I even dare myself to go filterless at times.

Don't do it, I did just once, and scratched a $1,000 lens. The lens cap came off in the bag