UV Filter? Yay or Nay?

flipexed · 10-17-2009, 07:08 PM

Arite just bought my first DSLR today... a Nikon D40. Hector aka "balut" insists i get a UV filter for my lens.

I've read that it makes colors more vibrant and protects the lense during accidents but i've also read that it doesn't really offer that much protection and can actually degrade the pictures somewhat.

They sell cheap ones for 55mm lenses for $10 at Bestbuy but i've seen some going for $50+... worth it or not?

balut · 10-17-2009, 07:16 PM

Haha

Welcome to the forum!
These guys here are very helpful and they're very easy to squeeze information out of em.

Don't forget to pot ur first pic out of that camera.

jezterr · 10-17-2009, 08:49 PM

get a uv filter.

the ones who say that it degrades the picture and doesn't provide much protection are morons.

the cost difference between the low and high end ones are due to coatings or quality/thickness of the glass which DOES affect the image, but it's so minute that you won't notice, unless you're analyzing each pixel.

asteelo · 10-17-2009, 09:06 PM

Keep cheap glass on all your lenses. You can always take the filter off when its effects arent desirable. I resort to filters all the time because I cant seem to keep a lens cap around for more than a week.

Tony S · 10-17-2009, 10:56 PM

I feel much better cleaning rain, snow, mud, goo, spit and sweat off of filters after shooting sports or in the woods than I would the front lens element. Don't scrimp on the quality though, it really does make a difference that is multiplied more if you are not using a top of the line lens. Combined with a good fitting lens hood you can't protect the lens any betterh. Now for in studio shooting where the is no chance of something getting on the lens I remove the UV filter as it sometimes will cause flare and reflections with strobes.
As far as making colors more vibrant I've not really seen much difference in that (a circular polarizer is what works here), it does bring a bit of clarity to an image on a bright day or at altitude in the mountains whee you would get UV haze.

flipexed · 10-18-2009, 07:09 PM

uv filter it is then

thanx

Inflex · 10-19-2009, 07:44 AM

Digital sensors only very slightly sensitive to UV, unlike film. Also, even film is only sensitive to a narrow spectrum of UV, and most filters (including name brands) lack the capability to filter that spectrum. There's a pretty good article out there that studies this, if you want to look. For practical purposes, you won't get any 'UV filtering effects" from a UV filter on a digital camera.

As far as protection vs quality, that's not as black and white as people like to make it. You need to consider all the factors by yourself. A UV filter isn't some magical force field that protects against all damage, and good quality filters are expensive. They WILL degrade image quality, and in some cases, will create artifacts that will ruin your picture. On the other hand, it's smart to use a filter for protection when dealing with adverse conditions.

The most important thing is to use a lens hood. Then, be smart about when to use and not use a filter.

flipexed · 10-19-2009, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inflex

Digital sensors only very slightly sensitive to UV, unlike film. Also, even film is only sensitive to a narrow spectrum of UV, and most filters (including name brands) lack the capability to filter that spectrum. There's a pretty good article out there that studies this, if you want to look. For practical purposes, you won't get any 'UV filtering effects" from a UV filter on a digital camera.

As far as protection vs quality, that's not as black and white as people like to make it. You need to consider all the factors by yourself. A UV filter isn't some magical force field that protects against all damage, and good quality filters are expensive. They WILL degrade image quality, and in some cases, will create artifacts that will ruin your picture. On the other hand, it's smart to use a filter for protection when dealing with adverse conditions.

The most important thing is to use a lens hood. Then, be smart about when to use and not use a filter.

Thanks for the advice guys... went out and bought me a UV filter today.

10-17-2009, 07:08 PM	#1
flipexed Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Lacey, Wa Posts: 5	UV Filter? Yay or Nay? Arite just bought my first DSLR today... a Nikon D40. Hector aka "balut" insists i get a UV filter for my lens. I've read that it makes colors more vibrant and protects the lense during accidents but i've also read that it doesn't really offer that much protection and can actually degrade the pictures somewhat. They sell cheap ones for 55mm lenses for $10 at Bestbuy but i've seen some going for $50+... worth it or not?

10-17-2009, 08:49 PM	#3
jezterr Moderator Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: a cesspit. Posts: 859 My Camera: disposable	get a uv filter. the ones who say that it degrades the picture and doesn't provide much protection are morons. the cost difference between the low and high end ones are due to coatings or quality/thickness of the glass which DOES affect the image, but it's so minute that you won't notice, unless you're analyzing each pixel. __________________ photos.juniormonkey.com \| www.juniormonkey.com Last edited by jezterr; 10-17-2009 at 08:51 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-17-2009, 07:16 PM	#2
balut Senior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: bellingham, wa Posts: 507 My Camera: canon eos 40d	Haha Welcome to the forum! These guys here are very helpful and they're very easy to squeeze information out of em. Don't forget to pot ur first pic out of that camera.

10-17-2009, 09:06 PM	#4
asteelo Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Silverdale Posts: 116	Keep cheap glass on all your lenses. You can always take the filter off when its effects arent desirable. I resort to filters all the time because I cant seem to keep a lens cap around for more than a week.

10-17-2009, 10:56 PM	#5
Tony S Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 140	I feel much better cleaning rain, snow, mud, goo, spit and sweat off of filters after shooting sports or in the woods than I would the front lens element. Don't scrimp on the quality though, it really does make a difference that is multiplied more if you are not using a top of the line lens. Combined with a good fitting lens hood you can't protect the lens any betterh. Now for in studio shooting where the is no chance of something getting on the lens I remove the UV filter as it sometimes will cause flare and reflections with strobes. As far as making colors more vibrant I've not really seen much difference in that (a circular polarizer is what works here), it does bring a bit of clarity to an image on a bright day or at altitude in the mountains whee you would get UV haze.

10-18-2009, 07:09 PM	#6
flipexed Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Lacey, Wa Posts: 5	uv filter it is then thanx

10-19-2009, 07:44 AM	#7
Inflex Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: everett Posts: 76	Digital sensors only very slightly sensitive to UV, unlike film. Also, even film is only sensitive to a narrow spectrum of UV, and most filters (including name brands) lack the capability to filter that spectrum. There's a pretty good article out there that studies this, if you want to look. For practical purposes, you won't get any 'UV filtering effects" from a UV filter on a digital camera. As far as protection vs quality, that's not as black and white as people like to make it. You need to consider all the factors by yourself. A UV filter isn't some magical force field that protects against all damage, and good quality filters are expensive. They WILL degrade image quality, and in some cases, will create artifacts that will ruin your picture. On the other hand, it's smart to use a filter for protection when dealing with adverse conditions. The most important thing is to use a lens hood. Then, be smart about when to use and not use a filter.