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

[bdunbar79]

The fact that people using filters as protection bothers you?  That concerns me more than anything.

I don't like sales people recommending filters for efs kit lenses as everyday protection. Cheap filters degrade quality and I learnt first hand when i got my 40D a few years ago.

There are hazardous situations that you will need protection which is fair enough but i don't think most of us here shoot in those conditions day in day out.

I got you now.  Yes I suppose it would be irritating if a sales pitch "heightened" the need for them, when it may not be so serious of a matter.  Actually, most of the "filters" I use are ND or CP's.  But of course those are special situations.

[ellenoir]

The last time i didn't use filter on my 70-200, the front lens scratched when put it in 70-200 case. So badly. so, i choose to wear a protective glass.

Cap it before you bag it. Otherwise filter it...

yes, i will. 

[Hodag]

FWIW, the UV filter (I'm on my third one now) has saved the front lens on my 70-200 f2.8L IS twice.

what happened?i have been shooting for years and yet to damage a front element and im pretty hard on my gear.if the uv filter smashes theres a good chance your filter will damage your front element anyway so i guess you mean from scratches

Not really, but if you drive without a seatbelt, because you don't have accidents you're just fine.

I have a collection of scratched and cracked filters and I'm fairly careful. One the wind blew over a tripod (when a freight train came from the opposite direction at about 80MPH) fell on the lens face. Another a car kicked up a small bucket full of gravel and threw it at me. (of course I was standing on the edge of a race track) 

Best reason is, when something gets on the filter, I grab a corner of my shirt and wipe it off, and I'm back working. If I ruin a filter, so what? Also there's rain, dust, bugs, sap, branches, mist, spray, and sticky fingers, unless you only shoot indoors.

And no I've never found that a UV or Haze filter ruins my images. But I have found that it's possible to save my lens from accidents. Every lens I own gets a filter when it's new, and it stays on forever.

[rs]

One time I had my camera hanging from my shoulder, 70-200 pointing down with the lens hood in place, and my camera started getting tugged. I looked down and found a dog with its nose up the lens hood - the filter needed a good clean after that. OK, its nothing that would have ruined the front element, but you never know what's going to happen.

[Ellen Schmidtee]

This is an expensive lens, so it's to be expected owners would like to protect it.

Of the lenses I have, it's the one I'm most worried would be damaged, though I have my photography equipment insured.

Yet, I don't use a UV filter for this lens. If I was shooting in a hostile environment, say a desert or rain, I would use one. In the urban environment I usually shoot, I feel using the hood when shooting and the cap when returning the lens to the bag are sufficient protection, and wasn't disappointed so far.

Another angle is that a quality 77mm UV filter isn't cheap either. It's cheaper than the lens or fixing it, but I would still worry it would get damaged, so why use one unless it's actually needed?

[enice128]

I use clear uv filters on ALL my glass! Make sure its a good quality one, at least spend the $ on a b&w one! The least u can do is protect ur expensive glass. The less expensive filters will effect the quality of ur images plus god forbid u bang the front element u only damage the filter not the lens!