[Conqueror]

Which lenses do you protect with filters?

---------- Post added 03-31-15 at 10:55 PM ----------

I have a slightly paranoid approach with this and end up fitting a protective filter to most (even if there is a substantial hood). Intrigued as to what you do...

[SpecialK]

Ah, the filter question redux.

[stevebrot]

For years, I always had a UV filter on all my lenses. Any more I use a rigid lens hood which provide protection from most hazards except things like salt spray. For that case, I still use filters.


Steve

[Steve.Ledger]

None, I use a lens hood.

[Sandy Hancock]

I stopped using protective filters three years ago, but always have the hood on when the lens is out of the bag. Since then I have shot several all day music festivals battling big crowds in hot dusty Australian summers, and innumerable smaller gigs.

No harm done.

[Imp]

All. I doubt there is any significant reduction of quality, and it doesn't hurt

[csa]

None, I use a lens hood.

+1. This is what I also do.

[geomez]

None, I use a lens hood.

Same.




I don't want to spend the money on filters nor want the reduction in quality.
Deglassed filters do the trick for corner drop protection without the IQ reduction, but it doesn't solve my problem of not wanting to spend the money.

[jatrax]

Lens hood only, but always.

I did use UV filters at Yellowstone near the thermal features but not otherwise. Most of the time I have a polarizer on assuming there is enough light.

[Steve.Ledger]

Filters can introduce glare and haze. I only us a CP when I need the polarizing effect.
If lenses needed this sort of protection I reckon the manufactures would add them to the lens by default or at least recommend using a 'protective' filter.

I never use LCD 'protectors' either..

[geomez]

I never use LCD 'protectors' either..

LCD protector is a must for me. Prevents scratches. Increases resale value. Doesn't impede viewing. There is no down side.

[UMC]

In fact, I used to have filters on all my lenses for 30 years,
BUT:

• I always purchased a filter from the same brand as the lens, e.g. SMC Pentax-A lens = SMC Pentax filter

Having said that, my principle was:

• Skylight gives you warmer, IMHO more pleasant colors on film. Therefore, all my Pentax lenses during the film age had a SMC-Pentax Skylight filter on
• During the digital age, automatic white balance makes the skylight filter obsolete, therefore I switched over to SMC Pentax UV filters.

However, recently I changed my mind, took off the expensive UV filters and started working with the lens-hood only.

BTW, I do not use protective LCD covers. I bougth the camera to work with it, not to sell it in pristine condition. So I'm not willing to subject to all the disadvantages of a LCD-protector just to avoid scratches.

[manntax]

or at least recommend using a 'protective' filter.

They actually did ! E.g. you can still read in older Asahi pentax lenses manuals that they recommended using the filter at all times - and not only because those were film times, but they explicitly mention protective function of it. I recall that from one of the older manuals I had for some Asahi lenses ( not sure which one was it)

Anyway , I normally don't use any filters, and prefer substantial lens hoods on , but on some occasion I use filter for protection , if I expect to experience any risk factors

[crewl1]

Filters are for special effects only IMHO.
If the manufacturer felt an extra piece of glass improved the IQ it would have been designed into the lens.

[mgvh]

Hood as often as possible, only use a circular polarizer when needed, but I do keep a high quality UV filter on my Sigma 10-20 4.5-5.6. That bulbous front glass looks like it's just waiting to be scratched...