Did you use a UV filter on 70-200 f2.8L IS (I or II) during its last use? (Poll)

[xstntl]

never do unless there is weather/conditions where I need the protection

[neuroanatomist]

1) Isn't true, almost all L lenses that are weather sealed do not need a filter to seal them, the 16-35 MkI and II and the 17-40 are the most notable exceptions.

...and the 50L, so it's good that RLPhoto had that filter in place.   

I'll also add that Chuck Westfall (Canon's tech support guru) has recommended using filters on all sealed L-series lenses with front threads.

[RLPhoto]

I answered yes.  I put a UV filter on every lens that will take it, and my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II is no exception.

1)  Most L lenses aren't fully weatherproof without it.
2)  It's easier to clean (flat glass, no ribs/ridges, you're not brushing the front element)
3)  The usual protection reasons... banging it against something, sand/dust, etc.

edited to add:  LOL at the cling wrap response!!

1) Isn't true, almost all L lenses that are weather sealed do not need a filter to seal them, the 16-35 MkI and II and the 17-40 are the most notable exceptions.
3) Works great in theory, until you break the comparatively flimsy filter and rub nice shards of glass on your front element.

There are very good reasons for using filters, and equally valid reasons to not use them, it really is personal preference as lenses have been protected, and ruined, going either way.

I tend to use them in very harsh conditions (I am often in salty spray and sandy conditions) but the rest of the time leave them off as I always use hoods and doing so mitigates many of the reasons people give for using filters.

How about at a crazy reception party? Where a happy patron swings around a beer, slathering your 50L with its lens hood on full of bubbly joy? Well, in my case my filter was pretty ugly and require a moment of serious cleaning. I wouldn't have felt comfortable cleaning my front element as harshly as it needed to be cleaned.

Now, this wasn't a "harsh" environment at all but one of the many times which a filter has saved my lens.

No, personally I don't care about drinks, kids sticky fingers or any number of other things, modern lens coatings are pretty tough, but like I said, filter use is an entirely personal opinion, there are pluses and minuses to both sides. I have lost two 17" MacBook Pros to drinks, I have never degraded any lens element because of it. Say he had swung his glass enough to break your filter? In that situation he might have knocked my lens hood off, I can put it back on again whereas you have glass shards all over your front element and in your filter thread.

 As for cleaning, I make my own solution out of Isopropyl Rubbing alcohol, ammonia solution and a little distilled water, it costs a couple of dollars for a good quantity and you can mix it strong to get ride of some very severe looking marks that often turn out to be grease and grime.

1. I always use lens hoods but that won't always save your lens or front element.

2. The filter is a second line of protection. As for shattering glass, I've had one shatter on my 24L II and simply unscrewed it, and continued to shoot the rest of the event. If I didn't have one, There would be one less 24L II in the world.

3. In the heat of good shots, stopping to carefully clean beer off your front element shows a lack of preparation as a candid-man and your in-experience to your employer.

Did you get those shots? You stopped because of that? Wheres your Filter?

[RLPhoto]

"3. In the heat of good shots, stopping to carefully clean beer off your front element shows a lack of preparation as a candid-man and your in-experience to your employer.

Did you get those shots? You stopped because of that? Wheres your Filter?"

Are you serious? Why would it take any longer to clean an element or a filter? Why would I be presumed to be more inexperienced because I was cleaning an element next to somebody else cleaning a filter? Nether of us would miss any more shots than the other........

As I keep saying, there is sound reasoning for either route, if there was a really good reason for one over the other then this question wouldn't garner such defensiveness.

That comment alone speaks for itself about your experiences. 

[sullivan06]

-Never on my 70-200.  I only use a filter on my 24-70.

[sagittariansrock]

Does the 70-200 II vignette with the F-Pro at the widest setting?
I remember Neuro saying something like that, but can't remember for sure 

Actually, I didn't test at 70mm, only at 100mm.  But there, the F-Pro did cause a slight increase in optical vignetting (there's some natively, of course).  I switched to an XS-Pro for that lens.

Thanks. I'd go XS-Pro then.

[iaind]

I use plastic cling wrap. Apart from protecting the lens it seems to have good static properties that draw the dust out of my lens. Plus from experience growing up it kept fungus out of my lunch so I think same applies for a lens, my sardine sandwiches never went green even if I didn't fancy them for a few days.

For use with a 5dIII without initial mod substitute black stretchfilm

[expatinasia]

I use plastic cling wrap. Apart from protecting the lens it seems to have good static properties that draw the dust out of my lens. Plus from experience growing up it kept fungus out of my lunch so I think same applies for a lens, my sardine sandwiches never went green even if I didn't fancy them for a few days.

You buy a US$ 2,XXX lens and then use cling wrap (presume that is the same as cling film)? Why not just get a good filter?

[bornshooter]

i agree with professional wedding photographer joe buissink
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/lenses_for_weddings.do

[neuroanatomist]

I use plastic cling wrap. Apart from protecting the lens it seems to have good static properties that draw the dust out of my lens. Plus from experience growing up it kept fungus out of my lunch so I think same applies for a lens, my sardine sandwiches never went green even if I didn't fancy them for a few days.

You buy a US$ 2,XXX lens and then use cling wrap (presume that is the same as cling film)? Why not just get a good filter?

No, the whole point of cling wrap is that it's thinner than any filter and helps with the weather sealing.  Also, I used to gel my flash, but with the new colored cling wraps, I can get that effect across the whole picture, and that's a lot easier than just adjusting the hue in post.

Even more important, my US$13,000 600/4 II can't even take a front filter. How lame is that?!?  Fortunately, cling wrap works just fine.

[expatinasia]

No, the whole point of cling wrap is that it's thinner than any filter and helps with the weather sealing.  Also, I used to gel my flash, but with the new colored cling wraps, I can get that effect across the whole picture, and that's a lot easier than just adjusting the hue in post.

Even more important, my US$13,000 600/4 II can't even take a front filter. How lame is that?!?  Fortunately, cling wrap works just fine.

Thanks. Interesting. There seems to be a lot of difference between what happens in the US and what happens in the Far East, at least at pro journo level. I am in numerous press conferences every week, major sporting events frequently and have never seen anyone use cling film (or wrap as you call it). Mind you, I have never seen coloured cling film either. Live and learn.

And, why would you want a filter on your 600/4? The lens hood is big enough as it is.

[bornshooter]

take from it only the point about UV filter please.

[neuroanatomist]

No, the whole point of cling wrap is that it's thinner than any filter and helps with the weather sealing.  Also, I used to gel my flash, but with the new colored cling wraps, I can get that effect across the whole picture, and that's a lot easier than just adjusting the hue in post.

Even more important, my US$13,000 600/4 II can't even take a front filter. How lame is that?!?  Fortunately, cling wrap works just fine.

Thanks. Interesting. There seems to be a lot of difference between what happens in the US and what happens in the Far East, at least at pro journo level. I am in numerous press conferences every week, major sporting events frequently and have never seen anyone use cling film (or wrap as you call it). Mind you, I have never seen coloured cling film either. Live and learn.

And, why would you want a filter on your 600/4? The lens hood is big enough as it is.

Because I love cling wrap.  I put it on my camera lenses, on my microscope objectives at work costing far more than the 600 II, on my sunglasses, on the windshield of my car and on the windows of my house. I just can't get enough of it. I'm thinking of wrapping my whole house in cling wrap, and then maybe my cat.  Meow.

And because I'm honestly afraid that you still might not get it, the whole line of discussion around cling wrap, starting from where the sardine sandwiches didn't turn green, is satire.

Yuk it up, these are the jokes. 

[RS2021]

Hmm ...with n= 80+, may be a dirty non parametric test is in order?

[bycostello]

more glass less IQ