OpticalLimits

Are UV filters a good idea?

bartonke

What does everyone think about UV lens filters? More specifically, I'm wondering if it's a good idea for me to continue keeping B+W UV Haze #010 MRC Master Filters on my lenses. I've heard that the benefit is that they offer an additional layer of protection on expensive lenses. However, I've also recently heard that UV filters can negatively impact image quality. If this is true, is the negative impact on image quality significant enough to outweigh the benefit of using the filter? Thanks.

stoppingdown

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/06/the-comprehensive-ranking-of-the-major-uv-filters-on-the-market/
https://blog.mingthein.com/2016/03/21/to-filter-or-not-to-filter/

Other than reading articles, I do my own tests and with good quality filters (B+W, but the past year I tried Sigma WR, same level and less expensive https://www.amazon.it/gp/product/B00NIHDMMU/) don't impact the visible quality of photos in normal conditions. I usually remove them only with the sun in the picture. Thanks to filters I saved at least two front elements ($$$) and, considering that the filters mounted on the most used lenses are covered with slight scratches after a few years, they also preserve the commercial value of the lens.

toni-a

From my side, I totally forgot about them, a hood is more protective and instead of deteriorating image quality it makes it better just stay away from poor quality hoods that don't have a mat interior and that can be shiny and light reflective.
So my advice if you want protection, by all means get a hood then consider if you need a UV protection filter or not, personally I stopped using UVs long time ago (since 2004)

wim

stoppingdown wrote
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/06/the-comprehensive-ranking-of-the-major-uv-filters-on-the-market/
https://blog.mingthein.com/2016/03/21/to-filter-or-not-to-filter/

Other than reading articles, I do my own tests and with good quality filters (B+W, but the past year I tried Sigma WR, same level and less expensive https://www.amazon.it/gp/product/B00NIHDMMU/) don't impact the visible quality of photos in normal conditions. I usually remove them only with the sun in the picture. Thanks to filters I saved at least two front elements ($$$) and, considering that the filters mounted on the most used lenses are covered with slight scratches after a few years, they also preserve the commercial value of the lens.

I have been using filters like that since my analog days, for protection. My camera dealer, a frie4nd who owns a pop and mom store in everything photographic, swears by them. He also does small repairs etc., and he says that of all the accidents he has seen with cameras, other than warranty issues, when it has to do with the lens, he has never had a lens with a filter that got other damage than the filter itself, but without, it always had to be sent back to the manufacturer for expensive repairs, or replacement with another lens. The most common accident is people dropping it from relatively small heights, or bumping into something, and a filter is an excellent protection for those types of accidents.

The filter ring is commonly made of metal, and that with the extra layer of glass, which also increases rigidity and makes it more sturdy, prevents the lens from getting serious damage most of the time.

His favourite filter brand is B&W, but if people do not want to pay that amount of money for a high quality filter, he has an alternative as well, forgotten which brand that is, but it is also an on both sides multi-coated filter. He doesn't do Sigma filters, however, for a very simple reason: colour cast. If you put a protection filter of several brands next to each other, the Sigma has a yellowish colour cast, where the others he carries are neutral. We are talking UV and protection filters here, of course.

Kind regards, Wim

toni-a

wim wrote
stoppingdown wrote
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/06/the-comprehensive-ranking-of-the-major-uv-filters-on-the-market/
https://blog.mingthein.com/2016/03/21/to-filter-or-not-to-filter/

Other than reading articles, I do my own tests and with good quality filters (B+W, but the past year I tried Sigma WR, same level and less expensive https://www.amazon.it/gp/product/B00NIHDMMU/) don't impact the visible quality of photos in normal conditions. I usually remove them only with the sun in the picture. Thanks to filters I saved at least two front elements ($$$) and, considering that the filters mounted on the most used lenses are covered with slight scratches after a few years, they also preserve the commercial value of the lens.

I have been using filters like that since my analog days, for protection. My camera dealer, a frie4nd who owns a pop and mom store in everything photographic, swears by them. He also does small repairs etc., and he says that of all the accidents he has seen with cameras, other than warranty issues, when it has to do with the lens, he has never had a lens with a filter that got other damage than the filter itself, but without, it always had to be sent back to the manufacturer for expensive repairs, or replacement with another lens. The most common accident is people dropping it from relatively small heights, or bumping into something, and a filter is an excellent protection for those types of accidents.

The filter ring is commonly made of metal, and that with the extra layer of glass, which also increases rigidity and makes it more sturdy, prevents the lens from getting serious damage most of the time.

His favourite filter brand is B&W, but if people do not want to pay that amount of money for a high quality filter, he has an alternative as well, forgotten which brand that is, but it is also an on both sides multi-coated filter. He doesn't do Sigma filters, however, for a very simple reason: colour cast. If you put a protection filter of several brands next to each other, the Sigma has a yellowish colour cast, where the others he carries are neutral. We are talking UV and protection filters here, of course.

Kind regards, Wim

Sigma has gone a long way since the yellow cast days, that's something from the past, we are talking lenses here, it would be a pity if they didn't upgrade the coating for filters

stoppingdown

«The most common accident is people dropping it from relatively small heights, or bumping into something, and a filter is an excellent protection for those types of accidents.»

Exactly my experience.
For what concerns hoods, I also keep them always mounted.

joachim

I have an Olympus 40-150/4.0-5.6 which displays heavy purple fringing on some of my Olympus bodies. Using a simple HOYA HMC UV, which I bought over 20 years ago, substantially improves the situation.

I assume the sensor of that body doesn't have a good enough UV filter on it's own.

smmsmrtn

bartonke wrote
What does everyone think about UV lens filters? More specifically, I'm wondering if it's a good idea for me to continue keeping B+W UV Haze #010 MRC Master Filters on my lenses.best sex dolls I've heard that the benefit is that they offer an additional layer of protection on expensive lenses. However, I've also recently heard that UV filters can negatively impact image quality. If this is true, is the negative impact on image quality significant enough to outweigh the benefit of using the filter? Thanks.

If your primary concern is protecting your expensive lenses, continuing to use the B+W UV filter is a good idea, especially since B+W is known for its high optical quality. However, if you're shooting in situations where lens flare or absolute sharpness is critical, you might consider removing the filter temporarily. Ultimately, it depends on your specific needs and the conditions in which you're shooting.