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

[ashmadux]

unless you are crazy, or have money to burn, or are extremely careful, this 2k+ lens should have a filter in front of that front element.
Whether you want to act like a purist, or dont like filters for whatever reason (yawn), i cant see a good reason why it shouldn tbe there. Well, if yer not cheap about it anyways.

 

[rpt]

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.

May be mandatory use of <sarcasm/> or <satire/> or plain <humour/> is in order

Oh, I voted no as now I have no filters permanently fitted on my lenses. Earlier I had and I can see the ones I used did cause degradation of the image. Some time soon (or later) I will look into getting some good filters...

 

[mrmarks]

Voted yes but it's not a uv filter but a clear filter. No need for uv filter (cuts off light unnecessarily) as the sensor has a uv coating, and a good clear filter does not affect IQ. I'm using B+W xs-pro clear MRC filter on all my lenses.

 

[Loswr]

Voted yes but it's not a uv filter but a clear filter. No need for uv filter (cuts off light unnecessarily) as the sensor has a uv coating, and a good clear filter does not affect IQ. I'm using B+W xs-pro clear MRC filter on all my lenses.

A UV filter doesn't cut off any light which the sensor can detect - as you state, a dSLR is basically insensitive to UV. A multicoated UV and clear filter from the same maker will have the same visible light transmittance (usually ~99%). For a dSLR, there is no difference between UV and clear in terms of optics. So...pick whichever is cheaper at your chosen source (it varies by country and seller).

 

[scrup]

It comes to personal choice but wow lots of people on this forum use filters as protection.

Lets put this into perspective.

For the ones that have it permanently on do you guys buy the paint protection for your brand new car as well?
How about eye protection when you go out of your house. After all your eyes are more important than any L lens.

This reminds me of some old timers that would bubble wrap their TV remote control so it wouldn't get damaged.
The most infuriating thing for me is filters on the 18-55mm efs kit lens. Who here would seriously recommend for someone to use a filter on this lens?

Some other interesting reads.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canondslr/discuss/72157630037025174/
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/good-times-with-bad-filters

 

[Loswr]

This reminds me of some old timers that would bubble wrap their TV remote control so it wouldn't get damaged.

Hmmmm...I wonder if bubble wrap would work better than cling wrap? :

 

[RLPhoto]

It comes to personal choice but wow lots of people on this forum use filters as protection.

Lets put this into perspective.

For the ones that have it permanently on do you guys buy the paint protection for your brand new car as well?
How about eye protection when you go out of your house. After all your eyes are more important than any L lens.

This reminds me of some old timers that would bubble wrap their TV remote control so it wouldn't get damaged.
The most infuriating thing for me is filters on the 18-55mm efs kit lens. Who here would seriously recommend for someone to use a filter on this lens?

Some other interesting reads.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canondslr/discuss/72157630037025174/
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/good-times-with-bad-filters

If the protection provided has the same level of protection as the filters I use, I wouldn't mind a clear, in discernible force field around my car. ;D

 

[bdunbar79]

It comes to personal choice but wow lots of people on this forum use filters as protection.

Lets put this into perspective.

For the ones that have it permanently on do you guys buy the paint protection for your brand new car as well?
How about eye protection when you go out of your house. After all your eyes are more important than any L lens.

This reminds me of some old timers that would bubble wrap their TV remote control so it wouldn't get damaged.
The most infuriating thing for me is filters on the 18-55mm efs kit lens. Who here would seriously recommend for someone to use a filter on this lens?

Some other interesting reads.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canondslr/discuss/72157630037025174/
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/good-times-with-bad-filters

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

 

[serendipidy]

This reminds me of some old timers that would bubble wrap their TV remote control so it wouldn't get damaged.

Hmmmm...I wonder if bubble wrap would work better than cling wrap? :

I think it certainly would provide better bokeh

 

[PeterJ]

This reminds me of some old timers that would bubble wrap their TV remote control so it wouldn't get damaged.

Hmmmm...I wonder if bubble wrap would work better than cling wrap? :

That's another technique I use often. It works like a compound eye and apart from an increased angle of view I find sometimes I can detect the light polarisation and later post-process, instead of carrying around an expensive CP that of course also loses some stops of light.

 

[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.

 

[scrup]

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.

 

[rpt]

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...

 

[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!