Filters- UV vs Skylight

[marty123]

I am relatively new to photography and would like to hear some opinions on wether uv or skylight filters are best for keeping on a lens all the time for protection.

[arthurking83]

No!

[kiwi]

No

Case closed - ignore all subsequent replies




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Steve Axford]

except this one

No!

[peterb666]

I use to say 'yes' but now I say NO as they are not required for digital photography and can lead to undesirable things like increased flare.

You don't need them for lens protection. Use a lens cap or lens hood instead and practice a little more care.

[gabby]

I've read all the replies to this thread as I'm also new to digital SLR's- I'm about to buy my first. Are you all saying that the use of a UV filter is not advisable with dSLRs? ( I used to always keep one on my ME Super unless I wanted another specialized one)

[Xenedis]

You don't need a UV filter for use with digital cameras.

Skylight filters and other colour-modifiers aren't necessary either.

If you're interested in protecting your front element, use lens hoods when you're shooting, and lens caps when you're not.

[kevinj]

If your lens falls head on,the broken filter glass will do more damage,front elements are pretty tough,maybe use one if your doing a lot of beach/surf style work where spray and windblown dust/grit could be a problem.

[arthurking83]

.... Are you all saying that the use of a UV filter is not advisable with dSLRs? ( I used to always keep one on my ME Super unless I wanted another specialized one)

Yes.

It's generally not advisable to use a filter unless it's for an actual effect that you're after.
In film days they used to help cut UV transmission through to the film as film was more susceptible to UV contamination.
Skylight filters do have an actual effect, so if your preference is to capture the effect of a slightly more pink less contrasty image without the use of software then by all means use it.

As protection, these kinds of filters don't really help protect your lens from impacts.
They can help protect your lens from getting dirty by seaspray, dusty environments, etc but you still have to clean the filter if you don't want IQ loss.

So there could be an argument put forward that a UV or skylight filter can help to protect the lens, but the point is moot. You can easily clean the lens as you can a filter.

The problem arises when your filter does start to get dirty in a dusty or ocean environment, where unless you keep it spotlessly clean it can produce more artifacts than an equivalently dirty lens. The distance between the front of the lens and the filter is the issue, and the dirty filter is going to produce more degradation in the image due to the distance and extra surface along the optical path.

Those folks that are too scared to clean their lenses should really take up another hobby. Lenses are hardy creatures and don't easily damage as some folks will lead you to believe.

I find it's usually easier to clean a lens than a filter when the front most element gets dirty whilst shooting.

of course there are those that totally disagree with these sentiments, and swear by the use of protective filters.
But! I've seen more damage done to a lens by having a filter on the lens, than any proof(yet) that having a filter on will safeguard your lens from damage.

[kiwi]

They do make great coasters


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[arthurking83]

Yeah, being glass they wipe off a lot easier than a standard cork type

[gabby]

Thank you all for enlightening me-I'll keep in mind the coaster value and save myself the expense. Gail

[Blueywa]

Just saved me a couple of hundred dollars thank you

[steamy]

great news as i was about to go and whack $70 on the front of my new lens to protect it!!!!

so what's the best method for cleaning your glass? couple of micro fibre cloths and lens cleaner
to get those finger prints off that the 2 year old loves to add?