uv filters for macro lens

[mapgirl]

I just bit the financial bullet and ordered a Canon 60 mm macro lens. I then went to Adorama on-line to buy a UV filter for protection. On advice I've seen at DPS, I got a multi-coated UV filter. When I called them to ask a question, I got a whole sales pitch for a more expensive set. OK, I get that this is what the operators are trained to do. But he said that the UV filter was the wrong thing to buy for a macro. Is that true or just a way to get me to buy something more expensive?

thanks!

[Bluenoser]

I've found that UV filters are a personal taste thing - some use them, some don't. I use them on all my lenses, including my Macro.

Enjoy your new lens BTW, I just sold my 60mm and bought the 100mm.

[mapgirl]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

I've found that UV filters are a personal taste thing - some use them, some don't. I use them on all my lenses, including my Macro.

Enjoy your new lens BTW, I just sold my 60mm and bought the 100mm.

Thanks for the reply. Why did you sell your 60 for the 100?

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by mapgirl

Thanks for the reply. Why did you sell your 60 for the 100?

Mainly because I wanted more distance between myself and the subject while still being able to get the 1-1 magnification. I found with the 60 I had to get close, too close for capturing insects as I usually (95% of the time) wound up scaring them away before getting a good shot.

The 60 is a very nice lens though, I used it for still subjects such as flowers and small objects and the image quality was superb.

Cheers

[p3dy]

Originally Posted by mapgirl

I just bit the financial bullet and ordered a Canon 60 mm macro lens. I then went to Adorama on-line to buy a UV filter for protection. On advice I've seen at DPS, I got a multi-coated UV filter. When I called them to ask a question, I got a whole sales pitch for a more expensive set. OK, I get that this is what the operators are trained to do. But he said that the UV filter was the wrong thing to buy for a macro. Is that true or just a way to get me to buy something more expensive?

thanks!

Well...i don't think it is necessary important to use uv filter..
Usually, macro or close up picture does not need filter but more on the lens itself...

Spend money on lens is more worth it rather than on the filter

[FocalFrenzy]

For me, it's more about protecting an expensive lens from dust and scratches. I have never noticed any "unatural" effects from using the filters, but then I've never taken any shots without them in place. You would be more likely to notice a difference if you were using a circular-polarizing filter. I use one for all of my outdoor shots (especially in sunlight). The differences I've noticed are usually for the better. I get much less "hazing", and that can improve alot of macro shots. It also helps with reflected glare. This is a plus when trying to focus on insect eyes. I hope this was helpful. I know alot of people don't use filters, but under mine, the glass looks as perfect as it did the day I purchased it.

[mapgirl]

Thank you all so much. I just needed to reinforce what I figured: that this guy was doing what he's trained to do which is to sell more stuff. I bought the UV simply for lens protection, but he made me think that the filter would screw up my macro shots. Sheesh!

And I feel better than ever about my choice. I do lots of botanical shots, so I'm not too concerned about startling the flowers .