You should know I saw the one - distorted bokeh - in many images. I'll have to dig up some others to show you. And the problem ceased when I removed the filter.
-Noel
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
I own UV filters for my lenses (because it was tradition back from the film days I guess). I don't use the filters though. Found they slightly degrade the lens optics.
Polarizing filters on the other hand... can't live without em.
-Tim
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
I could be missing something, but I haven't used a filter for the last 4 years since switching to digital, but I do have hoods on every lens.
My opinion (although it could be wrong) is that the photo is not degraded by shooting without a UV filter. I guess there may be rare situations when a filter may help when a hood does not, but I don't think there's anything that's going to eliminate (for example) lens flare if the light is coming from the front. As for the protection issue, it's a valid one, but I assume the risk, thinking that the lens hood will offer at least some minimal protection from side impact and some frontal impact.
I hadn't thought of this before, but I should probably mention that all my gear is insured, and my coverage even protects me from my own stupidity. So any accident would be covered as long is it were a legitimate accident.
Whether or not I would actually ever file a claim would probably depend on the amount of the loss. I'm one who believes that it's not worth the time or paperwork or risk of increasing rates if the amount of loss is small.
Also, an interesting FYI that this just brought to mind... next time you are about to send your gear in for cleaning or repair and you cringe at insuring it for it's value, call your agent and see if the your policy coveres loss in shipment. Mine does. I sent in my MkIIN in for service earlier this year and I have to tell you I felt a lot better when I was at UPS and I didn't have to tell them I wanted to insure it for something like $3500. If you ask me, that's like putting a "steal me" sticker on your package.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
This is akin to which is better the Canon or the Nikon. Its hard to change someones mind when they have their way of doing it.
We have always kept quality filters on the front of our lenses starting back in the days when we used Speed Graphics for candids. They protect the quality glass and that is all I care about. I have not observed image degredation except when I screw up the focus. That is not the filter or the lenses fault.
__________________ More camera equipment than anyone should have.
Member TPPA, NPS AUSA
Prospective member geriatrics center
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
I'm in slightly dangerous waters here, but my understanding is that modern digital cameras are less UV sensitive than film and so do not benefit as much from a UV filter. And, because of a slightly greater tendency for flare, adding another reflective surface to a modern digital camera seems to up the chances for unwanted flare spots.
Those two thing have combined to convince me to go "naked" and rely on my lens hood for protection. Plus, I may be crazy, but I see a difference. Not huge, but it's there and I need all the help I can get.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Just back from a vacation trip where I used UV filters, but only on my "standard" to "telephoto" lenses. I got such good, sharp results from my wide angle zooms (Canon 10-22 EF-S and Canon 17-40 EF) without filters I'm loathe to add them, even for protection, as I've heard wide angle lenses suffer more degradation from any filter deficiencies than other lenses.
I sent in my MkIIN in for service earlier this year and I have to tell you I felt a lot better when I was at UPS and I didn't have to tell them I wanted to insure it for something like $3500. If you ask me, that's like putting a "steal me" sticker on your package.
Hi Tim,
When I was going to school in L.A. in the ‘90s, I worked at a musical instrument store for about 7 years where we were selling woodwind instruments. We regularly received packages by UPS worth $30,000 to $50,000 from a French oboe factory and in turn sent those instruments (each worth about $3,500 to $4,500) to customers in the US – sometimes two-three instruments at a time, all with UPS.
During the time I was there we had one package stolen off of a UPS truck – but even then the thief was not going for “that” package – the driver left the truck unattended and whatever package was easily movable was taken off the truck… And I sent at least 5 “expensive” packages a week during that time.
I am sure there are people out there with shipping horror stories, but based on my experience I would take the odds with UPS.
Andras
P.S. No, I do not work for UPS
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Linear Mode
