UV/Skylight Filters

[john_gleason3]

<p>I only buy insurance to cover risks of loss that I can't easily afford. I can afford to repair or replace a $325 appliance or radio, so I don't buy the extended warranties or service plans that are offered. In the same way, I can afford a $325 repair on a lens so I won't pay $112 up-front as insurance to protect me from a possible $325 loss. It is purely a personal decision -- there is no right or wrong answer.<br>

I bought UV filters for all of my lenses for many years. Everyone else seemed to also. It was expected. Then one day I woke up and realized that I had been paying a lot of money over the years to cover a small-ish risk that I had never encountered. All the filters really did was make it more difficult to attach the lens shades and sometimes to de-grade the images. Now, without the filters I am probably even more careful about how I pick-up and hold each lens (I get a lot fewer fingerprints on lenses than I used to get on filters) and I always use the lens shades when carrying the camera. Maybe I'll scratch a lens tomorrow, but it is a risk I've considered and am willing to take.</p>

[Two23]

<p>Gogu--<br>

If you're plan is to buy only ONE filter and use it on all your lenses, you would be correct. However, if you are going to do that, why not just use the lens cap? In reality if you believe a filter will actually do something, you put one on each lens? Thus, if you have four or five lenses, you will buy the same number of filters? The cost then exceeds the cost of any potential repair. Or, do you think it's likely that ALL your lenses you don't have filters on will need repair? Highly unlikely. I haven't had a single lens damaged in a quarter century of hard use.<br>

Robert--<br>

There are some extreme situations, and yours may be one. I have photo'd quite a bit on Big Island, and also the crater on Maui. I did see some dust, but carefully cleaned lenses with a blower. I'll agree that pumice is very problematic though.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[incagraphy]

<p>quite a long time since the last comment.<br>

General agreement seems to be that using filters is a personal choice. You all seem to have experience. So, IF one decides to use a filter, which one?<br>

I would like to buy a filter for my Nikon 18-200 VR. It is only to keep it in case I engage myself in a risky situation of dirt/scratching. I am inclined for B&W brand. When I search for the MRC filter, the option I get says also "Haze". Is this something I need or am I supposed to look for something else?</p>

<p> </p>

[incagraphy]

<p>Apologies.<br>

Just found this post that seems to deal with my question:<br>

http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00Py04</p>

[eric friedemann]

<p>I thought of this old p.net thread when I saw this blog post- proof that 50 worn protection filters will degrade image quality:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/good-times-with-bad-filters">http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/good-times-with-bad-filters</a></p>