There is an article on PetaPixel about how much of a difference there is between a cheap UV filter and a more expensive UV filter. Reddit user EvilDoesIt shot this comparison between a $20 UV filter and a $70 B+W Clear UV Haze with MRC (Multi-Resistant Coating) filter.
There is a noticeable difference in contrast and clarity between the top image that was taken with the $20 UV filter and the bottom image that was taken with the B+W UV filter.
The thing is, though, UV filters are not essential with digital sensors. Sure, back in the film days, a UV filter can be important for film because some films are more sensitive to UV rays, which may result in haziness. But the digital sensors of today do not have that problem. If anything, a UV filter is adding another glass on top of your lens, and your lens, whether it’s $200 or $2,000, was specifically engineered to perform at its best without another glass in front of it.
Filters are pushed at stores because they carry huge markups for retailers, unlike lenses. They are the Monster Cable of photography.
A UV filter may add a level of superficial protection against fingerprints or blowing sand, but it does not protect your lens’ front element in the case of a dropped lens. The glass on a filter is actually not that hard to break, so if you drop your lens with a filter on, there is a chance that the broken glass can scratch your front element. The front element is stronger, though, and can take a more of a beating in the case of a bump or a fall compared to a filter.
The better option in protecting your lens, however, is a lens hood. Not only does it not degrade your image quality, but it also protects from bumps and helps control flare. Moreover, in the event that a hood gets cracked, it is unlikely to scratch your front element.
I have bought B+W filters for the majority of my lenses, but have since opted for hoods for daily use. It is only during a beach shoot where flying sand can scratch the front element, that I would use a UV filter. And if you do use a filter, don’t skimp on it. No sense spending $20 on a cheapo UV filter to protect your $2,000 lens.
So readers, do you tend to use filters, hoods, both or neither for your lenses?
22 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
i used to use filters, now i just use hoods
I primarily use filters because hoods are too cumbersome to carry around, especially out in the wilderness. The only time I use hoods are to protect against solar glare.
With that said, I’d like to mention that I once dropped an 85mm f/1.2L lens, and lost the pricey UV filter, but the lens was okay. Did the UV filter break the fall of the lens? I don’t know… I can imagine one scenario though: the UV filter’s own ring may have provided enough of a structural resistance to prevent the len’s outer rim (to which you screw filters on to) from caving in and making it impossible from putting other filters back on. If I remember right, the UV filter’s ring was indented.
The UV filter’s ring may have absorbed some of the shock, saving the len’s glass element from falling into pieces.
Of course, I never tried dropping the lens without the UV filter to see what would happen ;)
[…] great post from SLR Lounge authored by joe […]
I use a hood. It’s come in handy quite a few times, taking a hard knock against a table edge or column or whatever, that would otherwise have hit the lens.
If I’m in a really dusty/dirty environment, I *might* use a filter, but using “L” lenses really reduces the need for that type of protection. Although one of those cheap little rain covers can work wonders….
Superficial or not, I definitely do not like the idea of cleaning the front element of my lens with cloths and chemicals. I actually do a lot of my shooting outdoors and there have been times when I’ve seen a significant build up of ocean spray/salt on my filters and once in awhile deal with dust/dirt clouds passing.
Completely agree about seeing significant build up of ocean spray/salt, and land dust accumulating on the filters from time to time. We have to be conscious about regularly cleaning the glass religiously after an ocean or dusty area shoot
Use both and always B+W MRC’s.
I only use a hood, no filters on my lenses.
I made a test after 1 hour I read this article with my 7D+17-40mm and Hoya Pro1D UV. Same frame, on tripod, with and without the filter. Two shoots outdoors (sun and shadow) and one indoors. No difference in terms of quality. There was a small difference on the histogram for the shady area shoot, more highlights. Also for the indoor shoot.
Using a hood is essential. Better edge to edge sharpness, better exposure, better contrast levels. Why on earth would you leave it off?
I use Nikon Neutral Clear glass (no coatings) just to protect the glass. On very rare occasion I have to take it off due to flare, but that’s very rare.
Hoods are on all the time. UV Filters only at the beach or in the dust.
For me, the UV filter is really just for my eyes. I wish they have a UV filter for the view finder.
Hoods are on all the time.
They exist. They call them sunglasses.
Shooting with sunglasses on can be cumbersome though :)
So true. I worked in a store and saw it all the time. I get people who question my use of hoods, but my 70-200 has fallen twice and the hood took the force. I broke 2 hoods, for a total of about $50 total replacement cost. Still better than $2k for a new lens.
Sounds like you need to be more careful… Dropped your 70-200 twice?
I never use a filter, I don’t care how expensive it is it is not as good a glass as the L series lenses from Canon. I DO use a hood ALWAYS and they have protected my lenses from scratches and even when I dropped a lens it sustained minor damage. That only happened ONCE!
hood most of the time, but i did just buy a couple of hoya uv filters. ive avoided uv filters up until now, but i’ve become a little more paranoid when handling my glass.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/652134-REG/Hoya_A77UVC_77mm_Ultraviolet_UV_0_Haze.html
$34 each doesn’t really break the bank so hopefully it pays off.
I’ve had 2 UV filters save me in the past for very pricey mistakes. I’ll stick with UV + hood. I do agree however that cheap filters are a bad idea. The image is only going to look as good as the worst glass between the subject and the sensor.
Rubber hood on all lenses!!!!!!! It provides a little more protection as you can bump a table or something, an the rubber hood just absorbs the impact.
Almost always use a hood for protection and to help with flare. I only sometimes use UV filters.