Protecting you lens from being scratched

[ajax_andy]

Does anyone have any tips on the best way to avoid scratching your lens (other than being more careful lol)

I've heard UV filters are a good way, but has anyone tried this and are there any down sides to it?

I need to do something as no matter how careful I am I always seem to get small scratches on the lens!

[Bruce A]

Some photogs don't like UV filters as they are just another piece of glass between the sensor and the target image and can, on occassion cause issues. If you are going to use a uv filter for lens protection (and since you seem to always get scratches I think you should) then get good quality ones - I do. Also, use dust free lens microfibre cloths for cleaning. My 2 cents worth, cheers.

[OsmosisStudios]

1: use a lens hood
2: be careful.
3: seriously, just be careful.

I've had gear for years and have never had a scratch on any of the glass

[ceremus]

B+W 77mm MRC (010) UV Filter Review

There is an ongoing debate over the use of UV filters for lens protection. Neither side is wrong - they simply have differing opinions - and the freedom of choice.

The non-UV filter users say that their lens hoods provide all of the protection they need. They say UV filters degrade their pictures. Their contingency is that they can have a damaged lens repaired under their insurance coverage (check with your insurance agent for your specific coverage details).

Of course, an insurance claim does not put the lens back into service immediately. And an insurance claim puts a record with your name on it into the insurance company's shared claims database. Too many records in this database in a short time period will cause you to be considered a high risk.

I am a member of the UV filter users. A high quality UV filter such as the B+W 77mm MRC UV Filter will not degrade the final picture in most instances. A very bright light in the background of your picture *may* cause the filter to generate a small amount of flare, but I rarely detect any other filter-caused image defects. If I scratch the filter, I can simply remove it and keep shooting. And yes, this has happened to me (using a $1,000+ lens). I feel much more comfortable cleaning dirt off of an $80 filter than I do from a very expensive lens. I feel a little less protective of my lenses when they are protected with UV filters as well (I might let a friend actually hold it!). Note: A UV filter is not going to save the lens from a significant impact. You will still want insurance coverage if the lens is valuable.

Even non-regular filter users will want a filter when shooting in very dusty or harsh conditions (think salt water spray). Some lenses require UV filters to complete their weather sealing.

Some of the Canon Super Telephoto lenses cannot take screw-in UV filters (such as the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens and the Canon EF 500mm f/4 L IS USM Lens) but have a front element designed for protection exclusively. Is this Canon's endorsement for protective filters?

I personally do NOT consider a low end/low cost filter to be acceptable. Many of these exist - do NOT buy them. They will degrade the quality of your pictures with contrast and flare being the primary issues. Image sharpness can be affected. You spent a lot of money for your camera and lens in quest of good quality pictures. Don't throw away your investment with a cheap UV filter.

If you decide to get a filter, get one of good quality, and one that is multicoated to negate flaring issues. FYI, this will rule out any filter costing less than $40.

[windrider86]

I use UV filters on every one of my lenses and have never had an issue. Yes, you have to take them off every now and then to clean them. But, I'd sure rather do that than have the actual lens scratched

[Biomech]

All my lenses have decent UV filters on too

[SwissJon]

I don't like UV filters since one got jammed on while I was taking photos at -8 c and I had to break the damned thing to get it off.. Ruined a good set of photos because they all came out vignetted.

I suggest that if you do decide to use UV you use a VERY small amount of lubricant (I tend to use a teeny bit of silicon grease) on the threads.. But be careful when you put the filter away, because if you rub it, the grease will spread onto the glass.

[Biomech]

lubricant

hehehehehehehehehehehehehehe

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

1: use a lens hood
2: be careful.
3: seriously, just be careful.

I've had gear for years and have never had a scratch on any of the glass

For once, I agree with Os. And this is coming from a guy who shoots pellet guns at his subjects and constantly has to clean paint, fruit, and even fish eggs off his lens.

First, it's pretty hard to scratch your lens. They're pretty tough. Second, if you do get a scratch, it will not degrade your photo unless it is dead-center in your lens. Third, the cost of replacing the front element of your lens (about $200) isn't that much more than buying an expensive filter ($100+).

I wish I would've taken a picture of a Sigma lens I once I had...brand new, out-of-the-box, there was a huge chunk of debris inside the lens assembly. It was probably several millimeters wide, and a couple centimeters off from center. The photos from that lens were perfectly fine.

[Doug Sundseth]

Some things to think about:

Filters are much easier to break than lens front elements.

The shards and bent ring of a broken element increase the possibility of damaging the lens in some kinds of accidents.

When there is lots of blowing grit or corrosives (windy days in the desert or on the coast), it might be useful to cover the lens glass.

It's not clear to me that a filter will actually prevent impact damage in most sorts of accidents.

A filter good enough to not cause significant image quality degradation costs about as much as replacing a front element.

UV filtration is not useful with digital cameras.


FWIW, I don't use any sort of "protective" filter.