[ChrisPlatt]

Chris

[imtheguy]

FWIW.

The jawing is fun but its close to dishonest to post pics from the WORST performing cheap filters as if it covers them all....does not. I could have just posted the best from this test:

UV filters test - Introduction - Lenstip.com

and

UV filters test - supplement - Introduction - Lenstip.com

I would have considered posting only the worst example funny but not everyone has memorized these tests of many filters.

[bikecoboss]

ChrisPlatt:
That photo says it all for me... I was hiking in the mountains last week, wiped out twice on loose rock with the camera in my hand. No damage, but if I'm out hiking the protective filter stays on, IQ be damned (not that I've ever seen an issue). And as someone else pointed out, if you're anywhere near an ocean you're insane not to use one.

[RioRico]

[smashed filter]

That's OK, it's only a Canon.

[yotam]

ChrisPlatt:
That photo says it all for me... I was hiking in the mountains last week, wiped out twice on loose rock with the camera in my hand. No damage, but if I'm out hiking the protective filter stays on, IQ be damned (not that I've ever seen an issue). And as someone else pointed out, if you're anywhere near an ocean you're insane not to use one.

Seeing this horrible picture and reading your post makes me want some sort of protection for my lenses... (I am going to slip on some loose rocks, I know that...)
If it's not a UV filter - is there anything else?
Can you recommend on some model/series/brand?

Thanks!
Yotam

[blende8]

DAL 18-55mm, DAL 50-200mm

If these are your lenses, any serious protection filters cost more than the lenses, almost.
If there came hoods with these lenses, use them.

[Marc Sabatella]

ChrisPlatt:
That photo says it all for me...

Indeed - it is a wonderful example of why one should always use a *hood* with a lens, which protects the lens while actually *improving* rather than degrading IQ.

But relevant to the actual point of the thread - which is about actually filtering UV, not about lens protection - a lens hood clearly won't help there.

[magkelly]

That's OK, it's only a Canon.

You total Pentax snob, you!

I wouldn't wish that one on any camera, even a Canon. I think filters can be useful in rough circumstances, but I'm not a huge fan unless I do have salt and sand blowing my face or something like. As for slipping on rocks? That camera would be in a padded, preferably water proof, gear bag until my feet were on steady ground. Forget the lens hood/UV filter bit. I don't think that either would help much if you fell on rocks or into a lake.

[mlatour]

From recent experiences, if you do any low-light/flash photography,
always purchase the highest quality filter you can afford, putting
a lower quality filter if front of a fine lens just doesn't make sense.

In certain conditions, when very reflective objets are present
in my pics, even using what I consider is decent quality Sigma
UV-clear filters, I sometimes get a 'ghosting' (proper term?)
double image visible in my pics. (perhaps the large 82mm front
element of the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 also amplifies the problem)

Removing the filter instantly eliminates the problem but is out of the question
for me because having lens protection is much more important.