[Sholom]

The reason UV filters were so often recommended in film photography is because silver halide film (essentially all film) is inherently more sensitive to UV than to visible light. The lens glass and particularly certain types of lens coatings serve to significantly reduce the amount of UV that reaches the film but for many films that amount was sufficient to cause overexposed skies and other problems. Film is most sensitive to short wavelengths (UV, blue) and its sensitivity drops as one goes down the spectrum to the long wavelength side (i.e.red). Getting film to respond to red (via sensitizing dyes) was a major breakthrough in the early 1900s. Digital sensors are almost all the opposite: sensitivity is maximal in the red with very modest UV sensitivity if any. That is why if you are following the "expose to the right" dogma, you should be checking your red channel for overexposure and reduce the overall exposure accordingly. UV or clear glass serve solely as physical protective measures in digital, at the cost of increased risk of unwanted haze or reflections in your images. I own them but use them only when I think there is a real risk to my lenses.

[rogerstg]

a screw-in hood or Pentax square clip-on hood?

I've had the clip on hood fall off, and it's awkward to work with the lens cap. On the other hand, a screw on hood is more secure, and a 58mm lens cap fits on the end of it.

[ecostigny]

I believe you were misinformed back then. UV filters are just about clear and no filter factor for exposure was ever required to use them. The overexposure was most likely a mistake or misinterpretation of meter settings at the time. When using films with a degree of UV sensitivity the effect would be seen as increased haziness and excessive blue especially in background portions of landscapes. For those cases then as now a polarizer is capable of providing more improvement with a better overall effect than a UV filter can possibly obtain. I think you would be far more pleased if you try that.

I don't remember haziness or excessive blueness in the slides I took, so I'm guessing that this banged-up Olympus had a metering problem. With my own gear, I haven't had that kind of a problem. When I'm shooting outside on sunny days, I've been swapping out my UV filter for a polarizer and getting good results for decades. I looks as if I'll have to consider removing the UV filter for other types of shooting as well, right?

[From1980]

Yes, ecostigny. I've always thought lenses should be kept free and unencumbered. Use them the way Nature intended. NAKED.

[Cerebum]

I have one on my single in lens, and I didn't even notice