UV Filters and Lens Hoods

[Rick]

Hey guys I've just purchased a 18-200mm Nikon lens. I want to get a UV filter as some sort of protection. What would people recommend? Do the cheaper filters give distortion?

What should I be looking at when considering filters?

Also what sort of lens hood should I be looking at? Im leaning towards a rubber one from what ive read rather than the flower type.

Any input is greatly appreciated!

[Xenedis]

Please see the following thread for a detailed discussion on UV filters.

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...ad.php?t=63081

In short, don't bother with them; they're unnecessary.

[Rick]

Not even for protection of the front element?

[Xenedis]

Not even for protection of the front element?

If you have a read of the thread I linked, your question will be well and truly answered.

[Rick]

After reading the thread I'll prob just use a lens hood. Recommendations? What's popular?

[ricktas]

Did your lens not come with a lens hood? Did you buy it second hand. All Nikon lenses come with lens hood out of the box.

[Rick]

Oh ok. I actually haven't got it yet. Should arrive tomorrow! Brand new..

[Wingnut]

Well I was going to ask a question on UV filters as well, that link sorted me out, thanks for posting it.

[Tonym]

I just bought a Canon D50 with the 18-200 IS lens as a kit and it did not come with a hood, should it have? can I buy one for it?

[joele]

I just bought a Canon D50 with the 18-200 IS lens as a kit and it did not come with a hood, should it have?

No, Canon seem to like you to buy hoods separately, just buy a cheap on from HK on ebay, don't give Canon the pleasure of buying an expensive plastic tube off them ;-)

[trigger]

Is it the VR? If its protection you want. Forget about the UV ones.
Think a 72mm Kenko Pro1D Clear Protector / would do nicely. If your really paranoid get the Hoya HD

I've read both sides of the UV filter debate. I've been on both sides. Off on Off on ...
I finally did my own tests with some cheaper filters vs good filters, my results did not find any lost of IQ with the good ones. Its the cheap ones (Hoya Green/Purple - No brand ones)you have to worry about.

[Xenedis]

No, Canon seem to like you to buy hoods separately, just buy a cheap on from HK on ebay, don't give Canon the pleasure of buying an expensive plastic tube off them ;-)

Canon L-series lenses include hoods; non-L lenses don't.

I've read both sides of the UV filter debate. I've been on both sides. Off on Off on ...
I finally did my own tests with some cheaper filters vs good filters, my results did not find any lost of IQ with the good ones. Its the cheap ones (Hoya Green/Purple - No brand ones)you have to worry about.

The advice I would to someone who insists on using filters is to use good filters. However, I've seen a case where even a Hoya HMC (Hoya Multi-Coated) filter resulted in image degradation. This was during a night shoot where a city skyline (with point sources of light) was the subject.

[trigger]

Yeah. Hoya Multi Coated filters are a bit of a misleading term. Multicoating doesnt guarantee IQ quality or worse... messing up your AF.

From experience the Hoya Green ones are the worse... then there are the purple boxes HMC[N]. Then you have the white ones. HMC[O] ...O i think stands for optical glass. but still not that good.

The top ones for Hoya as as follows.

S-HMC (Super HMC) black box
Pro1D (Low profile with the above for UWAs) black/blue
HD (Hardened Glass) <----$$$ (Solid Black box)

If your on a budget with a digital camera. I'd go for the "Protector" type instead of the UV. Also Kenko are identical except in price to the Hoyas. So most of my lenses are kitted with Kenko Pro1D Protectors.

I've seen a case where even a Hoya HMC (Hoya Multi-Coated) filter resulted in image degradation. This was during a night shoot where a city skyline (with point sources of light) was the subject.

Only time I experienced flaring, not IQ loss, was with a UWA lens and a non low profile filter. It was a Hoya Super HMC CPL I

Might not be for every one. But I have 3 experiences where a protector saved my lenses.

1. Kid shoving hands full of cake into my Tokina 11-16mm
2. Using rapid strap had my lens pointing down 70-200mm 2.8 IS with hood on. Resting nicely on a stake like wedding decoration on my filter. Result = filter scratched front element saved
3. Bro in laws Tamron 18-270mm VC (dropped with 500D) hood was backwards as it was in a bag. result = Filter ring crumpled and glass cracked (Kenko Pro1D UV) Lens and thread in perfect condition yah!..

I would like to also point out that filters are needed to seal some lenses. Namely UWAs such as the 16-35mm, 17-40mm and esp zoom (dust pumps) like the 17-55mm f2.8 IS / 24-105mm.

[ronaldhw]

I used to be in "no filter" camp, hood is more than enough to protect the lens. But now, I use UV filter to protect my lens, because of small accident.

the accident: I was using a blower to remove dust from one of my lens, normal cleaning routine that I often do after photo shoot; suddenly the nose blower came off and hit the front element of the lens.. and left a permanent tiny dot.... the blower itself is a good blower, a German made.. it's similar like this http://bit.ly/d446ZA

since then, I always use filter.., been using hoya HD filter for my lenses, and I don't see any IQ degradation

[RamblinR]

With the Canon 17-55mm f2.8 lens it is recommended to use a UV filter to stop dust entering under the front element (a known problem with this lens).