Do I need a UV filter?

[TP1]

According to Tywais, I do need a UV filter as it will protect my lens.

On the other hand I was watching a Youtube tutorial, by a professional photographer, and he was saying that I shouldn't use UV filters as they distort the image.

I would appreciate your advice, that will help me make a decision.

Many Thanks

TP

[Goompa]

TP , I would follow Tywais advice , I have a UV Filter attached to all my lenses capable of attachment .

There are some reasons for distortion , that, being the el-cheapo versions of UV filters , but as a rule a good quality filter will not effect an image .

The main reasons is for protection of the front element , but also it does eliminate the need for cleaning and risking the scratching of the glass also .

Some cameras cannot be classified as weather-sealed unless a filter of some description is attached , I certainly would prefer to clean a filter than

having to clean my lens everytime a bit of water or dust got on it !

Ok the final decision is up to you , but personally I would not be without one , small price to pay for insurance , just use quality .

[sunshine51]

TP...

What has already been said by Ty & Goompa is excellent advice. Buy a good quality UV filter

for all your lenses, attach filter & leave it there forever. Not only will it pretty much keep dust

& water/booze/soft drinks spots off your lens's objective element (outer bit of glass you can

touch & leave fingerprints on) it will protect that outer element from not only scratches but

chips caused by impacting stones etc striking it. And they also protect against UV radiation.

...overly blue pictiures when you know you've set white balance properly.

Some very filter good brands are...Nikon, B+W (a brand, not black & white), Tiffen, Lee,

Hoya & Kenko. These will cost you more than other brands and you will eventually be

glad you bought one instead of the cheap crap in fancy packaging available at any

camera store which always seem to advertise on the filter box said filter inside is for

"digital" cameras. That's a bunch of crap IMO.

Lens element replacements are expensive. An expensive UV filter is cheaper.

[vaultdweller0013]

Do you need a UV filter?

In general, with a digital camera, no, you do not need a UV filter. The primary reason UV filters were needed was because film was sensitive to UV light, so you could end up with a blue-ish color cast in images taken in sunlight. Digital cameras are generally not very sensitive to UV light, so a UV filter is not needed.

However, you may want to use a UV or clear filter on a lens to protect it the front element from marks or damage.

The only case where I have personally seen a noticeable affect from a clear filter was with lens flare:

The above was taken from Bangkok during the recent eclipse. Shot with a Sony a77ii and the 70-400mm G II and a Tiffen HD clear (not UV) filter. The green crescent above the moon is cause by the filter. Below is a handheld shot with the filter removed:

Now, did the lens flare really affect the shot? Not really, it wasn't a good photo to begin with and is not a typical photo as the sun lit portion of the moon is very, very bright compared to the part still in Earth's shadow. But, it is the only example were I have personally seen the affects of a front UV or clear filter.

For an interesting read on the affect of dust, scratches, etc. on a front element of a lens see http://kurtmunger.com/dirty_lens_articleid35.html. Not saying that you shouldn't use a filter, just interesting to see an example of the actual effect of a scratch or major damage.

[rhythmworx]

Same as Goompa, I have a UV on every lens.

I use Hoya HMC filters they are relatively cheap and good quality, they have a decent anti reflective coating on them unlike cheapo filters.

I notice no colour or image degradation.

I found an interesting video on Hoya HD UV filters, they cost a bit more but if you watch the video I guess they are worth it.

I might go and buy one today for a new lens, if not I'll stick to the cheaper HMC version.

Whatever you do buy from a reputable camera dealer and not off ebay or amazon. I would make a guess more than 50% of filters on them sites are fakes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cT6wBQR7iqE

[TP1]

Thank you gentlemen.

Your advice was very useful to me.

At the end, Tywais was absolutely right.

So tomorrow I'm off to Khon Kaen to get 2 good UV filters.

Cheers.

[Familyonthemove]

A qualified 'yes' from me.

I use them on most of my lenses for all the reasons others have said - protection from scratches and easier cleaning - but some lenses have high-tech and expensive lens coatings ('nano'-tech on Leica/Lumix lenses for example) and a filter may add some lens flare issues that the posh lens coating is designed to prevent.

So I use them on my everyday 'walk-around' lens as the camera gets stuffed into bags - and on my telephoto as due to it's length it gets knocked about.

But on my portrait lens where flash and lights may cause lens flare/reflections I don't use a filter.

[FracturedRabbit]

No you don't need a UV filter, as Vaultdweller said; they are pretty much redundant nowadays in terms of improving image quality.

However, my personal preference is to have a clear glass protective filter on all of my leneses. These are as readily available as UV filters and offer the same physical protection with less risk of interfering with IQ.

[Tywais]

Perhaps a little clarification from my initial statements from another topic. Being a film photographer for decades it was an automatic thing to do - buy a lens, get a matching filter. In film's case, due to the emulsion sensitivity to UV, it made a real difference. Raw digital sensors are sensitive to UV & IR but they are coated with UV & IR cut coatings plus modern lenses don't pass below a certain UV threshold. Older digital camera sensors and lenses have a bigger chance of passing UV and a UV filter would be more important then current technology.

UV filters and protective filters are often used synonymously though that is of course not really true in the purist sense. It's up to the individual their comfort level with having one with the slight chance it will make a change in IQ or prefer the protection. It is a mixed bag in the many debates out there regarding the usage or not needed camps. I still use them because my lenses aren't cheap and with a quality filter there should be minimal effect on the image. Testing your camera and lens with one on and off will tell you how much an issue. If it is a color balance shift, that can be tuned out in most dSLRs or similar cameras. Personally I haven't seen any issues and color production and clarity has been good. Yes, it was a carry over habit and would probably go for clear high quality protective filters now.

Article here

[FracturedRabbit]

If you are lucky Olympus user, they will sell you their own high quality protective clear glass filters to fit their lenses. Have them on my 12-40 and 40-150.

[rws85]

I recently brought a new camera and also got sold a 77mm filter to 'protect' my lens.

The first thing I noticed once I fitted the filter was I can no longer put the lens cap on.

Which makes me wonder how people use them for protection. Are you putting the filter on and taking it off every time you get the camera out?

I think it would of been nice if the lens cap could fit onto the filter.

[Fiddlesticks]

I personally don't use protection. Seriously, I prefer to render the clearest, sharpest image I can and rely on my lens hood to protect my lenses whenever the lens cap is not on the lens. I also will use filters such as polarising and/or ND filters and with the UV added to the mix it is just too much glass (taking it off and storing it away temporarily is a pain also), adding layers and distance sitting in front of a lens I paid a tidy some for because of it's quality. Also, when you spend that much for a quality lens, you tend to treat it carefully.

[samuijimmy]

I wish I could find the stick on leads to keep the lens cap hanging, from camera to lens, here. Shops here on Samui "no hab" ....

When one puts the cap in the bag one tends to forget to put it back on....