UV/Protector Filter

[canonman]

Interesting reading for some.

http://lensesforhire.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/smashing-fun-with-filters.html

LFH always supply a fitted filter but also send out the filter case so that you can remove it if you wish.

 

[Joe P]

A hood for me. It provides more protection than a filter most of the time and is guaranteed to not add flare. In fact, it reduces flare.

Joe

 

[Rico]

I've experienced the safety factor of a filter. And I use hoods, mostly. Helps avoid flare.

I noticed inconsidtencies with colour rendition a while back, learned not all lenses the same. In my film days, a UV filter down here was essential - so much UV!

Interesting thing I noted changing from my original 70-200 2.8 VR and my newer one. Images didn't have the same feel; colour rendition wasn't as good. My original one had a Nikon (L37c?) filter. The newer one had a Hoya. I'd tried some experiments with a B+W I got on sale (62mm mount) on a couple of other lenses on the basis it was similar optical quality to that Nikon filter. Yep.

Bit the bullet, bought the muticoated B+W for the 2.8VR lens and now, everything was as it should be. I've since equipped my 20, 50, 85, 35-70 with the same filter, and am delighted. I'd previously used Hoya or Marumi DHG Lens Protect. Now I have greater consistency between lenses, and it's very close to shooting filterless.

If you can work without a filter, I think you're better off without, generally. Where you need one, it's logical (to me) to select a filter with the least sins of omission. Getting out of the way, robbing you of less as the light makes its way to your sensor.

For me, the B+W filters are the optical equivalent of 'Naim Aro interconnect' - getting out of the way.

 

[JemHayward]

I did use a UV filter on my 18mm f2 Fuji lens when I used it as my "pocket" system on my X-E1 instead of using a lens cap. I managed to get a Zeiss T* UV filter at a good price, but I only used it for a short time. Generally I use metal hoods for protection, and the edges of my Fuji bear witness to its usefulness. My Zeiss 135mm lens has a built in hood (good idea) that retracts (bad idea). I dropped my original 135mm down a mountainside, the hood retracted, and so I damaged the front element (small chip) - but rather more seriously smashed my 18mm Zeiss lens good and proper! Thankfully the insurance people paid. They asked for the remains of the 18mm (it was worth about £1k) - but weren't interested in the damaged 135mm, so I still have it. I cannot actually tell any difference between images with the "perfect" lens vs the one with a really obvious chip in the front element. If it was the rear element, it would be a different story, and any damage to the front element on a wide angle lens would be a disaster.
I still don't use a UV filer on any of my lenses now.

 

[mjroe]

It is interesting to see everyones responses - as expected there is a mix of opinions, but Yes is winning by around 2:1, so is that just good marketing by the filter manufacturers?

In the end I caved, as I just psychologically have an issue with seeing dust and fluff accumulating on the front element of my lenses! And with my daughter and all her cousins being under 5 it makes sense to protect against 'jam hands'.

I had two Hoya Pro1 filters already and Amazon supplied the remaining 3 for £60 in total, so not a massive cost, the Pro1 filters had significantly reduced reflections when compared with the other Hoya filters I have.

I'd previously used Hoya or Marumi DHG Lens Protect.

Were these the standard Hoyas Rico, or the more expensive Pro1 or HD ones?

 

[imattersuk]

I bought a B+W Nano coated clear glass protection filter for the XF23mm

Zero degradation to my eyes and much easier to clean than the Hoya UV I have on the 18-135, that said I've not noticed any degradation on the Hoya either but can be a pain to clean. Using Zeiss lens wipes on the Hoya it also needs a thorough buffing with a decent microfibre or you get streaks, the B+W seems less fussy.

I see there's now a lens pen specifically for filters, apparently designed for flat glass.

 

[Rico]

Were these the standard Hoyas Rico, or the more expensive Pro1 or HD ones?

In the old days, just standard Hoyas. Most recent was a Pro1, I think (it's gone now). The B+W is good enough that I can see the difference. YMMV.

 

[Evaldas]

I am looking for a UV filter for a Fuji XF 18mm f2 lens. I am leaning toward B+W filters.
There are two 52mm filters available: 52mm slim (XS-PRO) and other one is 52mm UV filter (F-PRO). Is the slim version more suitable for wide angle lenses?

 

[JTC]

I always have with Canon, but to be honest optical glass is tough, and unless you physically dunt the glass against something, it'll be easy to restore to perfect with a lint-free wipe and some proper optical glass cleaning fluid. So, I'm probably not going to bother with filters on the Fuji setup...

 

[JTC]

PS. I've read somewhere that the front element can take a serious amount of surface marking before it has any real effect on the image produced. If memory serves, it was really only noticeable in terms of increased susceptibility to flare than any issue with resolution. I imagine this will vary depending on aperture and lens focal length.

 

[Rico]

I am looking for a UV filter for a Fuji XF 18mm f2 lens. I am leaning toward B+W filters.
There are two 52mm filters available: 52mm slim (XS-PRO) and other one is 52mm UV filter (F-PRO). Is the slim version more suitable for wide angle lenses?

XS-PRO is slim and multicoated (MRC) PLUS sometimes (option) has the nano-coating for easy cleaning.

F-PRO is the standrard mount. I think some are single coated, some are MRC (multicoated). Not sure if the F-PRO is available with nano coat.

Well, I say 'standard', but hell, they're brass! not cheap alloy. They've a lovely weight to them.

Spend some time here https://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommerce/CatalogSubCategoryDisplay.aspx?CID=57

and in the catalogue.

HTH