Hoya 77mm Pro1 digital protector filter £15.17 @ Amazon/ Camera KIng

elbrownos

Because it's a total waste of £7

You're already wasting 15 anyway, so what's the difference? I've never really take any precautions when using my camera. Slide it in the bag, take it out and shoot. Wind, rain, whatever. Both 24-105L and 50/1.8 haven't got a single scratch after years of doing so. And I wipe both with my t-shirts and not £19.99 cloth made of Mongolian baby llama's leather.

barneyonion

Good price but why not buy a polariser, leave it on the lens and turn it … Good price but why not buy a polariser, leave it on the lens and turn it on and off as it would give you lens protection and some reflection reduction on sunny days which cuts through haze for landscape photography. Ultimately lens caps are the best lens protection, Regardless of the optics there is no such thing as a passive filter no matter how good it is, it degrades the light a bit.Read lessRead more

turn the polariser 'on and off'? thats fancy
polarisers are in no way general purpose leave and forget items
apart from the fact they reduce light transmission you constantly have to adjust them depending on where you face
its not really cutting through any haze either
if spending 15 why not spend 22 on an actual UV one?

prefer to use the lens hood as protection which saves many & doesn't reduce image quality. at least polarisers & nd's do a job

This is protector filter not uv filter...

dinmk

This is protector filter not uv filter...

you don't need a UV filter on digital anyway, so I guess if its good quality with decent coatings it should be fine

Good price but why not buy a polariser, leave it on the lens and turn it on and off as it would give you lens protection and some reflection reduction on sunny days which cuts through haze for landscape photography. Ultimately lens caps are the best lens protection, Regardless of the optics there is no such thing as a passive filter no matter how good it is, it degrades the light a bit.

brilly

if spending 15 why not spend 22 on an actual UV one?

Because it's a total waste of £7

barneyonion

Good price but why not buy a polariser, leave it on the lens and turn it … Good price but why not buy a polariser, leave it on the lens and turn it on and off as it would give you lens protection and some reflection reduction on sunny days which cuts through haze for landscape photography. Ultimately lens caps are the best lens protection, Regardless of the optics there is no such thing as a passive filter no matter how good it is, it degrades the light a bit.Read lessRead more

The reason you don't use a polariser on the lens all the time is that it reduces the amount of light that gets in all the time its on there, typically 1.5-2 stops of light for most polarising filters which means up to a quarter of the light hitting the sensor so much slower shutter speeds or the need to use a much higher ISO to maintain your shutter speed. normal use probably not an issue but it is for some.

I personally only use a protection filter if there is chance the front element will get something on it, flying mud or something else otherwise I use the lens hood for protection.

"£19.99 cloth made of Mongolian baby llama's leather.
Have you got a link please... and is it the one hand woven on Hawaiian maidens thighs...

Codmouth

"£19.99 cloth made of Mongolian baby llama's leather.Have you got a link … "£19.99 cloth made of Mongolian baby llama's leather.Have you got a link please... and is it the one hand woven on Hawaiian maidens thighs...Read lessRead more

I bought mine off an elf on a shopping trip at the north pole!

I only use a UV filter on my 18-105 VR (don't buy that lens, by the way, save up for something else), and I only use it because the front element is very exposed. On all my other lenses the front element is slightly recessed so I don't use one.

I used to have a UV filter on my 50mm 1.8D prime, too. I dropped the camera one day, and the UV filter shattered. The lens was fine, but I had to use pliers to remove the deformed filter, before then using precision tweezers and compressed air to remove all the gritty pieces of glass from the front element. Inevitably I couldn't get them all off, so that lens suffered some minor scratching. It just wasn't worth it at all - the FE on the 50mm 1.8D is very recessed anyway.

(edited)

That's a great price, I bought the 67mm a while back for a canon 70-200 l and it's great. Think I paid almost double that!

Good Price! I have ordered 3 replacements for my main 77mm lenses, thanks

Wow!! Just ordered mine!! Ta Very Muchly OP, Great Deal ;-))))

elbrownos

Because it's a total waste of £7

pff an investment!
im sure i wouldn't notice a difference with my crap photos but is it really only film that sees any effect now?

It really is pathetic that some people still think that putting a UV filter on a digital SLR actually does anything.

Use a lens hood or buy a protector if you are looking for protection, almost all DSLR lenses have built in UV protection nowadays.

(edited)

Isn't a UV filter exclusively for protection of old fashioned film? I used one on my old kit lens with an NEX 5N and it definitely had an effect on picture quality.

I use a protective filter on my Zeiss NEX lens, purely because it's miles easier to clean than the lens element, the lens hood offers far better protection from dinks in my opinion.
(edited)

Waste of time, why buy glass then stick more glass on it. I've never scratched a lens. A hood provides better protection, better contrast and you probably already have it.

£15 for a lens protector that has an RRP of £65 and sells in most camera shops for £45 discounted? There are a lot of fake Hoyas around and most people won't know how to tell the difference.
Why do you need a protector though? Take a look on Ebay at the vast number of lenses for sale, and try find one with a scratched front element ! Even if they do get marked it doesn't detract from the image quality unless it's really huge.
Front elements are really tough glass and you have to do a lot to mark them, having said that I do know one photographer who did manage it - when the protective filter broke for no good reason and the sharp pieces scratched the lens!

Thoughtful

£15 for a lens protector that has an RRP of £65 and sells in most camera s … £15 for a lens protector that has an RRP of £65 and sells in most camera shops for £45 discounted? There are a lot of fake Hoyas around and most people won't know how to tell the difference.Why do you need a protector though? Take a look on Ebay at the vast number of lenses for sale, and try find one with a scratched front element ! Even if they do get marked it doesn't detract from the image quality unless it's really huge.Front elements are really tough glass and you have to do a lot to mark them, having said that I do know one photographer who did manage it - when the protective filter broke for no good reason and the sharp pieces scratched the lens!Read lessRead more

Exactly what happened to me, except I don't think chucking the b****rd on the floor counts as "no good reason"! Same result though!

brilly

polarisers are in no way general purpose leave and forget items

Neither are passive filters as they degrade light, for landscape photography they are really useful so why not try and get some value out a filter while giving lens protection on a shoot.

brilly

its not really cutting through any haze either

They cut through reflections from moisure in the air as the light has to be planar to pass through, just google some images of the effect.

brilly

if spending 15 why not spend 22 on an actual UV one?

Because UV filters are an outdated artefact of Film SLR cameras and they are not needed for DSLR