Quick UV filter question.

[MichaelBarry]

Does a UV filter reduce the amount of light going to the sensor i.e will I get a slower shutter speed?

I was thinking of buying one, just to have constantly on my lens as protection.

How about this one?

Hoya UV standard filter

(on a very low budget).

 

[Phrasikleia]

No, a UV filter won't reduce the shutter speed, but a cheap one can reduce contrast and cause flare. Have a look at this experiment:

http://www.kenandchristine.com/gallery/1054387

 

[MichaelBarry]

No, a UV filter won't reduce the shutter speed, but a cheap one can reduce contrast and cause flare. Have a look at this experiment:

http://www.kenandchristine.com/gallery/1054387

THANKS! I'll definitely invest more after seeing that. didn't really think it made a significant difference.

 

[MichaelBarry]

although the description says that the filter is coated on both sides? is the filter still bad or is this just a really good deal?

Hoya 55mm Standard UV Filter

 

[Phrasikleia]

although the description says that the filter is coated on both sides? is the filter still bad or is this just a really good deal?

Hoya 55mm Standard UV Filter

The feature to look for is "multicoated." Hoya's abbreviation for these filters is HMC.

 

[Westside guy]

I think buying cheap UV filters for protection just degrades your photos. If you really feel the protection is necessary, spend the money and get a good filter.

Personally I stopped putting protective filters on my lenses. They mainly (in my opinion) just protect the lens from small scratches, which wouldn't degrade the image quality anyway. But I know some people feel very strongly the opposite way.

 

[toxic]

Does a UV filter reduce the amount of light going to the sensor i.e will I get a slower shutter speed?

it's possible, but i doubt it will be enough to reduce shutter speed.

every piece of glass (and air molecule, for that matter) between the subject and the sensor reduces light. this was a problem a few decades ago when making zoom lenses - zooms require more glass than primes, and there would be too much light loss as a result. now we use multicoated glass, so it's no longer a problem.

i believe there should be charts showing the light loss of different UV filters (at least within the same manufacturer). i think the best filters let in 99%+ of the light. uncoated ones will allow much less.

 

[Doylem]

Whenever I buy a lens (and it's not very often... ), I buy a skylight filter too (reasonable quality...). It's mostly to give me peace of mind, so I won't be worrying about damaging my lens. And, IMO, an unworried photographer takes better pictures...

 

[joro]

Whenever I buy a lens (and it's not very often... ), I buy a skylight filter too (reasonable quality...). It's mostly to give me peace of mind, so I won't be worrying about damaging my lens. And, IMO, an unworried photographer takes better pictures...

Agreed. When I bought all my new L Lenses, I went ahead and capped them off with Hoya UV Filters just to protect the glass. I'd rather scratch a $40 filter than a $1,500 lens!

 

[jampat]

What do you need protection from? A filter provides limited protection in a fall, it mainly keeps junk off the front lens element and can (in some cases) slightly increase the weather resistance of some lenses.

When shooting concerts I use a filter as tons of water/sweat come flying off stage and I would rather not be wiping down the lens every hour. When taking shots in a controlled environment, there is no need for a filter.

 

[Doylem]

When taking shots in a controlled environment, there is no need for a filter.

True enough. And if I ever shoot in a controlled environment, I'll let you know...

 

[jbernie]

Even in a controlled environment I wouldn't necessarily avoid one, so you may not have small pebbles flying at your lens, but it isn't impossible to get a scratch.

I have a scratch on one lens of my driving glasses, no idea how it got there as nothing hit them... no playing football.. not crazy antics... just my normal average life... $160 later to replace the lenses.....

 

[MichaelBarry]

brought a Hoya HMC UV filter last night so the decision has been made.

also brought a minolta 50mm 1.7 last night too so need one for that too haha.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I have always had a good UV lens on my cameras; I agree with both Doylem and jrotunda85 - a good lens can be very expensive and it makes sense to protect it from scratches, and falls (as I can attest from personal experience).

Cheers and good luck

 

[cutsman]

For me, I always shoot with the lens hood as protection. This has been sufficient for me... so far...

 

[telecomm]

I always shoot with the lens cap on. Unbeatable protection.

 

[LittleCanonKid]

I always shoot with the lens cap on. Unbeatable protection.

I personally always shoot with the camera and lens in an empty, dust-less room! Works like a charm!

 

[HBOC]

i used to use one, but only when i am shooting at the beach or something, but even then i am probably using a split grad anyways.

Lens are coated from the factory. And most of the time, i have some sort of filter on the lens, as most of my shooting is nature/landscape/waterfalls..

 

[telecomm]

I personally always shoot with the camera and lens in an empty, dust-less room! Works like a charm!

Hey... not a bad idea! You're probably getting better exposures than I am.

Seriously, though, scratches and dust are not as big a deal as people might think.

Skeptical? Check out this (posted in another thread here a little while back).

 

[MichaelBarry]

Skeptical? Check out this (posted in another thread here a little while back).

WOW!