UV Lens filters: pros and cons

[bigone5500]

What are the pros and cons of using a UV lens filter? I have read that they are great for lens protection and I hear that most all folks use them. But what are (could be) the downside to using one? Should I only use one outside?

[thegrandpoohbah]

Cons: reduced image quality. I use lens hoods for protection.

[OsmosisStudios]

Many (cheap) UV filters are either uncoated or only single-coated, which means the glass is either un-touched or only covered with one layer of specialized coatings. These can cause flare, ghosting and smearing.

I only ever use a UV filter on my lenses if there's a very real possibility of them getting dirty or damaged: out in the rain, snow, or doing anything potentially dangerous.

[dcclark]

The main con is flare, as has been mentioned.

The main pro is protection.

Overall, they're not amazing, but rarely do (multicoated) UV filters cause problems either. I keep one handy, but only use it occasionally nowadays.

[kirbinster]

In the olden days lenses did not have UV coatings, but today's lens do - so there really is no need for these filters. While they may add an ounce of protection they do degrade your image. You are better off just being careful and leaving a lens hood on and skill the filter.

[WooD]

I use a multi coated UV filter on 3 of my lens that I use the most. I sometimes shoot in unfavorable conditions, like blowing sand, sea spray, and fog / scum coming in off the ocean.

I've never had an issue with lens flare.

I've never done a with or without filter test using studio lighting, I'm going to have to try that next time.

[WooD]

hmmmmm..............

I've often thought my $100 Nikon 50mm f/1.8 was sharper than my $1,200 17-55mm f/2.8

I have a good quality B+W multi coated pro filter on the 17-55, but nothing on the 50.

I'm going to have to look into this more.

[BryanC]

Originally Posted by WooD

hmmmmm..............

I've often thought my $100 Nikon 50mm f/1.8 was sharper than my $1,200 17-55mm f/2.8

I have a good quality B+W multi coated pro filter on the 17-55, but nothing on the 50.

I'm going to have to look into this more.

It will be interesting to know the results of any testing that you do. Please, keep us posted.

[inkista]

I'm a klutz, and I shoot outside near the ocean and in dust a lot, so I keep UV filters on all my lenses all the time, and simply take them off when they give me flare. I also like that I can just wipe off the front of any lens with a shirt tail without worrying about scratching a front element's coatings. I get very paranoid and worried whenever I shoot with my fisheye, because I cannot put a filter on the front of it (and yes, the coatings have been scratched). I've replaced the filter on my 400L twice now for scratches and dings. Good enough reason for me to be using them.

I just use Hoyas, not B+Ws for the most part. No point in having a cheap replacement if it isn't cheap.

This is a personal preference thing, though. I paid $1100 for an L, I'm gonna damn well protect it. Other folks think I'm insane because I paid $1100 for an L and I'm deliberately mucking up the quality I paid for. I just know, I like not worrying about keeping the front element absolutely pristine, and shooting with or without the filter doesn't make that much difference as far as I can see.

lensrentals.com says that replacing front elements is actually cheaper than replacing UV filters for them. And some front elements are actually protective and not part of the optical design--essentially doing the protective job you got the UV filter for. But personally, I hate being without a lens for the time it takes to send it in for repair and get it back. I'd rather put a filter on the front.

In reality, a scratch on the front element doesn't necessarily make a huge difference to image quality. It only makes a huge difference on resale value.

[CaptainNH]

I have filters on all my L glass for the same reasons as inkista. I think about how much time, effort and my money went into the coatings on the front elements of my lenses, I do anything I can to save me having to polish it off with constant cleaning.

I've got $150 MC filters on my glass (B+W and Rodenstock) to try to minimise any image degradation.

If I'm doing a studio shoot, I'm happy to take them off and go naked