• The Canon Rumors Forum has officially been shut down as of July 10, 2026.

    All data will be deleted on September 16, 2026.

    the ad free experience will return by July 17, 2026.

Protective filters - redux

neuroanatomist

Itchy shutter finger
Jun 19, 2012
901
1,564
4,658
Boston, MA
Not the first post on the subject (though a link to a LensRentals blog post that was provided by @AlanF going on 9 years ago is still relevant), but just a reminder of why I use protective filters on almost all of my lenses.

I started to clean front of my RF 24-105/2.8 Z, and noticed this on the B+W 82mm UV filter that I had on it:

Filter Scratch.jpg

I'm sure replacing the front element would have been much more costly than the $100 for a new B+W 82mm clear filter to replace the one above.

Incidentally, a couple of years ago I wrote a long post about B+W's 'new' filter mounts (Basic, Master and T-Pro) and packaging (leather pouches announced for their 75th anniversary). That post seems to have disappeared. I'm sticking with the Master line. It has the same spec as the prior XS-Pro while the T-Pro mount is very slightly thinner, but I find the XS-Pro to be more than thin enough, and I'll pass on the titanium-colored coating instead of the black coating on the same brass; I also prefer the knurling on the Master over the smooth T-Pro edges.

Despite their announcement in 2022 that, "From now on, all B+W filters will be delivered in high-quality cases made of genuine leather," they've changed the packaging inside the box yet again. For those keeping track, it was a plastic box with a foam insert for many years, then a brief flirtation with a fabric bag before the switch to a leather pouch in 2022, and now they are using a lightweight metal alloy box (aluminum-looking but a magnet sticks) with a foam insert.

B+W cases.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Not the first post on the subject (though a link to a LensRentals blog post that was provided by @AlanF going on 9 years ago is still relevant), but just a reminder of why I use protective filters on almost all of my lenses.

I started to clean front of my RF 24-105/2.8 Z, and noticed this on the B+W 82mm UV filter that I had on it:

View attachment 227285

I'm sure replacing the front element would have been much more costly than the $100 for a new B+W 82mm clear filter to replace the one above.

Incidentally, a couple of years ago I wrote a long post about B+W's 'new' filter mounts (Basic, Master and T-Pro) and packaging (leather pouches announced for their 75th anniversary). That post seems to have disappeared. I'm sticking with the Master line. It has the same spec as the prior XS-Pro while the T-Pro mount is very slightly thinner, but I find the XS-Pro to be more than thin enough, and I'll pass on the titanium-colored coating instead of the black coating on the same brass; I also prefer the knurling on the Master over the smooth T-Pro edges.

Despite their announcement in 2022 that, "From now on, all B+W filters will be delivered in high-quality cases made of genuine leather," they've changed the packaging inside the box yet again. For those keeping track, it was a plastic box with a foam insert for many years, then a brief flirtation with a fabric bag before the switch to a leather pouch in 2022, and now they are using a lightweight metal alloy box (aluminum-looking but a magnet sticks) with a foam insert.

View attachment 227287
I hadn't brought any during the clothe period. Personally I did prefer the plastic cases to the leather although I suppose leather is better environmentally.
The metal should be better as far as recycling goes, correct?

The other year a protective filter cracked when my rf 85 1.2 fell, but the lens itself was fine. I don't know if the front element would have broken without that filter.

Somewhat off topic:
I've been using filters to reduce contrast. In many situations, it can help to produce more accurate colors, but other situations, the autofocus can't adjust or their is a blinding from the very bright areas into the adjacent darks.
 
Upvote 0
Not the first post on the subject (though a link to a LensRentals blog post that was provided by @AlanF going on 9 years ago is still relevant), but just a reminder of why I use protective filters on almost all of my lenses.



Incidentally, a couple of years ago I wrote a long post about B+W's 'new' filter mounts (Basic, Master and T-Pro) and packaging (leather pouches announced for their 75th anniversary). That post seems to have disappeared. I'm sticking with the Master line. It has the same spec as the prior XS-Pro while the T-Pro mount is very slightly thinner, but I find the XS-Pro to be more than thin enough, and I'll pass on the titanium-colored coating instead of the black coating on the same brass; I also prefer the knurling on the Master over the smooth T-Pro edges.

Despite their announcement in 2022 that, "From now on, all B+W filters will be delivered in high-quality cases made of genuine leather," they've changed the packaging inside the box yet again. For those keeping track, it was a plastic box with a foam insert for many years, then a brief flirtation with a fabric bag before the switch to a leather pouch in 2022, and now they are using a lightweight metal alloy box (aluminum-looking but a magnet sticks) with a foam insert.
FWIW, I purchased T-Pro UV-Haze / protection filters last June and all (77mm/82mm) were packaged in leather pouches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0