Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Protective filter or not?  (Read 4850 times)

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3379
    • Pieter Kers
Re: Protective filter or not?
« Reply #20 on: June 21, 2017, 06:14:24 am »

Lensrentals concluded- a good filter does not impact the quality except for some extra flare.
In the rare occasion i have images prone to flare I take the filter off or when i work in a studio ( safe) environment.
Just returned from the beach and was happy to have the filters on...

Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8830
Re: Protective filter or not?
« Reply #21 on: June 21, 2017, 09:38:55 am »

No protective filters here. Never had a lens front element scratched as far as I recall.

The increase of flare is just too high.

Same for me, but I do use lens hoods to reduce the risk of flare and glare. Because the filter is some distance in front of the front lens element, dirt also shows as being more in focus, and the lens hood is less effective as well because it lacks some extra depth.

The only exceptions are Color Correction filters, Polarizing filters, and ND filters, and under circumstances of extremely nasty dust (if the dirt cannot be rinsed off because it's sticky, or before it dries), like dirt track bike or car racing, or salt water spray, or high up in the mountains a UV filter might be useful. For events like the Holi festival, a rain cover also seems a wise thing to use.

So my take on it is to use the filters for the purpose they are designed for, not mounted permanently. And even when used for special purposes, a multi-coated filter with high-quality plane-parallel glass is preferred.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

JKoerner007

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
  • "A picture's worth a thousand words."
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Protective filter or not?
« Reply #22 on: June 21, 2017, 11:04:13 pm »

I just rely on the hood unless I need a polarizer, nd, or similar. So far so good and my gear goes to some rough places.

I rarely use filters anymore, except those that come inherent internally in super-telephoto lenses.
(They interfere with sharpness and authentic colors IMO.)

As a macro/bird shooter, I don't need them.

I just use hoods as protection.

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Re: Protective filter or not?
« Reply #23 on: June 22, 2017, 12:58:10 am »

Flare as a streak is pretty obvious.  But flare also can cause a slight loss of contrast, not obvious.

I'm in the no protective filter camp, just don't want to take a chance on slight image quality loss.  I've never scratched or damaged a front element.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up