Camera Labs

The use of protection filters have been debated repeatedly on forums, and probably since before forums existed. Regardless, I'm curious who uses them?

Note this is specifically about protection filters, or other filters used primarily for protection (e.g. UV).

I'll start the ball rolling with a "sometimes". I use them as a risk-benefit tradeoff. If I know I'm going into a higher risk area, then I'll more likely fit one. This could include wet areas, macro, or when a I need to get close up to a fence. I would also not use them if there is a significant flare risk.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

Meh, occasionally. I have a 77mm Hoya HMC I use on my 70-200 as a "sacrificial filter". When it rained quite badly at a concert, I removed the filter halfway through. Cleaning it would've taken too much time.

That kind of use. Aside from that, I hardly use the lens caps for my lenses due to to my lens hoods. But maybe I'll buy some filters for 24/7 use so I can skip the caps completely, and just swap out the filters every so often.

Depends on your photo style of course. Speed is everything for me.

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".

I always use a protection filter. When I look at how often I have to clean my filters because of dust and fluids, I rather have a little bit less quality than having my front element exposed to all that.

_________________
www.pimvandevelde.com

For me it really depends on the lens. An example would be my 50mm I have a filter on at all times however on most other lens I dont worry about it.

_________________
D200 - Sigma 100-300mm f4 - Sigma 180mm f3.5 - Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 - Nikon 50mm f1.4 - Tokina 12-24mm f4 - Nikon Sb-600

I don't yet own filters of the correct sizes for my new Sigma 17-70 and Canon 85mm. I don't think I'll bother with the Sigma lens, since it usually has its lens hood on anyway. But I'll probably get a filter for the 85mm, and I already have one for my 10-22mm.

_________________
Body: Canon Rebel XS, Canon EOS 7D
Lenses: Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.0 OS HSM DC Macro, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS II, Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II, Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM, Canon EF 85mm f1.8 II USM

I always use filters, I've always had a B&W UV filter on each lens that I own. My older AI-S lenses have them plus my newer 16-85. I don't like to get those cheap, $10 Hoya filters that they'll sometimes try to sell you with the camera, I'll always try to get a high quality filter that won't degrade the lens quality, something that will match the glass of the lens. UV filters are all that I really use. I have some polarizers and ND filters for occasions, but otherwise I'll just keep a UV filter on the lens for protection. After all, it's better to damage an $80 filter than an $800 lens.

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams

I have UV neutral filters on all my lenses.
I shoot pretty much exclusively wildlife so I'm in and out of the woods swamps ditches wherever I need to go %100 of the time.
I also take my camera on the water with me,I work on the ocean and salt spray on the lens face = salt when dry.
I'd rather clean that off an expendable filter than a lens face.

_________________
Pentax K-5
Pentax 18-55mm,Pentax 50-200mm,Sigma 17-70mm,Sigma 70-300mm, Sigma 50-500mm

never. I am very sensitive about sharpness & I want the best,so I don't use filters. Besides,I'm doing a great job protecting the lenses without filters. And all my gear looks like new.

_________________
Gear: Nikon D80, 18-105mm, 35mm F/1.8, 85mm F/1.8, SB-600
Visit my work here

I returned from my camping expedition today, the camera lasted well. It rained a bit, but the camera has no water damage. Unfortunately, when I arrived home I forgot to close the camera bag, and, well, the pictures explain the situation...





The filter? Damaged beyond repair. The lens? A slight dent and can be repaired. I rest my case that protection filters are definitely worth it.

Besides, if I can't get the lens repaired, I can always make it into a mug...

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams

But it's no 300mm L-lens...

I'm using protection filters on three of my four main lenses. I just couldn't get myself buying a 77mm UV filter yet as these things are pretty expensive.
So well, yes, my 100-400mm lens is only protected by the lens hood at the moment.

_________________
Canon EOS 500D + Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Canon EF 24-105mm 4L IS USM + EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS USM + EF 100mm 2.8L Macro IS USM + Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM + Canon Speedlite 580 EX II + Nissin Speedlite Di 466

The hoods aren't the best way to protect the lens. If the lens falls out of your camera bag (as mine did) chances are that you'll have the lens hood retracted. besides, a lens hood can break and you can still easily damage your lens.

it's too bad about my lens, I was planning to catch a Jays game in Toronto next week but I won't be able to photograph it without a tele lens, it's too late to rent one and by the time I send my 200 in for repair who knows how long it will be gone for...

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams

I've never heard of a lens hood retracting, that lens above looks quite old. Newer lens shouldn't experience this problem, esp. higher quality "L" lenses. And if the lens hood does fall off or break or whatever it's still helping because it would absorb the brunt impact of the fall.

Then again my only real experience is the lens hood on my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS L. Its always on indoors and out just for protection... and its dead sexy.

I don't use any protection filter because they degrade image quality. I've heard the nicer ones don't but they are very expensive. I feel safe with only a lens hood.

_________________
Canon 40D + 70-200mm f/2.8L IS + 50mm f/1.8
Manfrotto 055CX3 + 496RC2
www.thomaslowe.com

What I meant was when you have the hood reversed, retracted, etc. inside your bag when you're not using it instead of having the hood jut out the front of the lens. Sure, if you were out shooting with the lens when it fell the hood would probably absorb the fall a bit, but not when the lens falls out of your camera bag (as mine did).

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams

Personally, I just use the hoods and no UV filters. Light quality isn't the best here and sticking another 'element' in front of the lens just doesn't do it for me.

I have had one instance of a lens dropping out of a bag - around 1.5m onto a tiled floor. My heart sank as I saw it falling in slo-mo, front element first.

The floor tile cracked but there wasn't a scratch on the lens. The metal hood took the fall and there was no dent, scratch or anything. The only evidence was a white mark from the tile which wiped off. Zeiss panzer-like build quality!

Now if there was a UV filter, would it have taken the fall, or perhaps shattered and caused damage to the lens itself? If there was VR, autofocus or other delicate electronics, would that have fared any better - that's another topic for discussion though!