Canon Community Canon Community

Posts: 8,740
Registered: ‎12-07-2012

Re: UV filters?

"...only costs about $200-$300 to replace."


The front element on my ef 85mm f1.4L was $385.


"Filters don't protect "expensive lenses"."


And you are right it didn't !  Smiley Sad

A lot less stuff for 2018 but still a lot of Canon stuff. Along with, a lot of other stuff.
Honored Contributor
Posts: 5,999
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: UV filters?

[ Edited ]

MikeSowsun wrote:

Filters don't protect "expensive lenses". They only protect the front element which probably only costs about $200-$300 to replace. 

I would beg to differ.  Some lenses need a protective front filter to complete the weather sealing.

Some people like to use protective filters.  Some people do not like to use protective filters.  Personally, I like having a protective filter, because as already been noted, it is easier and safer to clean a $80 filter than a front element of a $2000 lens.


"I don't rent software. I use Photoshop CS6, ACR 9.8 and Lightroom 6.8 ."
Posts: 8,740
Registered: ‎12-07-2012

Re: UV filters?

"... it is easier and safer to clean..."


Bingo! Smiley Happy

A lot less stuff for 2018 but still a lot of Canon stuff. Along with, a lot of other stuff.
Super Contributor
Posts: 209
Registered: ‎01-31-2017

Re: UV filters?

[ Edited ]

inkjunkie wrote:

I understand the importance of me the big one is the protection of scratches...

I do use a UV filter too, but not to filter out UV light. That isn't necessary with modern lenses. I use it for front-element lens protection. I am often in environments that can wreak havoc on a lens -- areas of the California desert, in forests, along tide pools and the ocean.


In desert shooting,I don't always shoot on my feet. If i encounter a desert tortoise, scorpion, lizard, snake or some other reptile, I like to get on my belly and shoot them "eye to eye," which produces a more pleasing perspective (in my opinion) than shooting them from above. So it is not unusual for the lens to be a an inch or two off the desert floor, nor is it unsual to find a few grains of sand, DG, dirt, dust, etc. on the filter after shooting. This is why I also carry a small retractable brush, blower and lens tissues with me in my pack.  I should probably use a hood to go along with the filter, but the UV filter is better than nothing.


I also use a circular polarizing filter when I'm around water or shooting a landscape with a lot of sky, and its effects are quite noticeable when rotated. I don't understand arguments against filters in these environments, but have become convinced that some people who make those arguments don't shoot in the kinds of environments I do. But to each his own, as they say.

Valued Contributor
Posts: 306
Registered: ‎11-19-2017

Re: UV filters?

I'm the same.  UV filters for element protection.  Lens puffer is invaluable.  Keep one in my pocket at all times now. 

Bay Area - CA
~6D2 (f/w 1.0.3) ~16-35mm f2.8L II, 50 f1.8 STM, 85 prime, 70-200 f2.8L IS II ~Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Art
~Speedlite 430 EX II ~DPP 4.8.20 ~Windows10 Pro nVidia GPU 1709 ~Nexus6P Oreo 8.1 ~Samsung s9+ Oreo 8.0
powered by Lithium

LIKE US on Facebook FOLLOW US on Twitter WATCH US on YouTube CONNECT WITH US on Linkedin WATCH US on Vimeo FOLLOW US on Instagram SHOP CANON at the Canon Online Store
© Canon U.S.A., Inc.   |    Terms of Use   |    Privacy Statement