06-08-2012, 04:44 PM
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1339100880' post='18751']
Filters are not great for protection. They do work fine in especially dusty and sandy places like windy beaches to keep the lens "clean", but the damage control of them on impact situations is low. In fact, front elements are very hard to break, but filters very easy. Which makes filters a hazard for scratching front elements. They are known to get jammed badly into the lens filter threads too.[/quote]
I disagree with you here. From my personal experience they provide very good protection indeed.
A camera retailer friend of mine will supply a good filter if you care enough to want one. Based on his experience, lenses with filters mounted generally only suffer from superficial damage, and only require replacement of the filter. Those with no filter, lens hoods mounted or not, generally siffer much more, and internal damage when knocked.
He gets several damaged lenses a week in, approximately half with and half without filter. Almost all of those without filter have to be sent on to a repair shop, the ones with the filters mounted only rarely so. They generally just require the mounting of a new filter. And if a filter gets stuck in the threads: he has the tools and the tricks to remove them easily and quickly, without damage to lens or camera.
He reckons the metal filter ring is likely the reason they suffer less damage. He thinks it provides additonal protection to distortion when knocking it against something, or dropping it.
As to the idea that filter glass breaks easily: in the 35+ years I have been shooting slrs and dslrs, this has never happened to me, and I have always owned a considerable amount of lenses, all equipped with filters. And I know I have dropped quite a few of them.
Lens caps actualy easily fall off lenses, certainly in my experience. I use them, but IME one of the first things that happens when a lens is dropped, is that the lens cap detaches itself from the lens. Speaking from experience here. It seems to take only very little for this to happen, like a relatively soft fall on long grass.
Of course the whole filter/no filter debate is really endless, and all I can say is that based on my own experience and based on what I have seen and heard at my friend's, I reckon a good quality UV or protection filter, be it relatively expensive, is a very good investment as a lens protector.
My lenses all wear B&W MRC nano-filters these days, except a few mFT lenses with 46 mm thread, which wear normal B&W MRC filters. MRC nano filters are not available in 46 mm thread, but since MRC was the filter of choice for me prior to the advent of the nano MRCs, I don't consider that a big drawback <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.
Kind regards, Wim
Filters are not great for protection. They do work fine in especially dusty and sandy places like windy beaches to keep the lens "clean", but the damage control of them on impact situations is low. In fact, front elements are very hard to break, but filters very easy. Which makes filters a hazard for scratching front elements. They are known to get jammed badly into the lens filter threads too.[/quote]
I disagree with you here. From my personal experience they provide very good protection indeed.
A camera retailer friend of mine will supply a good filter if you care enough to want one. Based on his experience, lenses with filters mounted generally only suffer from superficial damage, and only require replacement of the filter. Those with no filter, lens hoods mounted or not, generally siffer much more, and internal damage when knocked.
He gets several damaged lenses a week in, approximately half with and half without filter. Almost all of those without filter have to be sent on to a repair shop, the ones with the filters mounted only rarely so. They generally just require the mounting of a new filter. And if a filter gets stuck in the threads: he has the tools and the tricks to remove them easily and quickly, without damage to lens or camera.
He reckons the metal filter ring is likely the reason they suffer less damage. He thinks it provides additonal protection to distortion when knocking it against something, or dropping it.
As to the idea that filter glass breaks easily: in the 35+ years I have been shooting slrs and dslrs, this has never happened to me, and I have always owned a considerable amount of lenses, all equipped with filters. And I know I have dropped quite a few of them.
Quote:Your usage of hoods is a very good practice. Hoods do have a habit of absorbing bumps. Of course, lens caps are great protecting when the lens is not in use.
Lens caps actualy easily fall off lenses, certainly in my experience. I use them, but IME one of the first things that happens when a lens is dropped, is that the lens cap detaches itself from the lens. Speaking from experience here. It seems to take only very little for this to happen, like a relatively soft fall on long grass.
Quote:And no, UV filters add nothing to digital in regards to filtering UV, as the sensor/glass already does that. With film UV could give a haze, with digital without UV filtering we would get false colour. That is why digital cameras filter UV standard.
Of course the whole filter/no filter debate is really endless, and all I can say is that based on my own experience and based on what I have seen and heard at my friend's, I reckon a good quality UV or protection filter, be it relatively expensive, is a very good investment as a lens protector.
My lenses all wear B&W MRC nano-filters these days, except a few mFT lenses with 46 mm thread, which wear normal B&W MRC filters. MRC nano filters are not available in 46 mm thread, but since MRC was the filter of choice for me prior to the advent of the nano MRCs, I don't consider that a big drawback <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />. Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....