UV filter or CP to protect lens?

[limvo05]

Hello,

Just bought my first Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM lens. I was wondering if anyone could give me some advises on either using a UV filter or CP to protect the lens? I am leaning toward the latter, i.e. CP as it dubs as both lens protector and CP functions. Also, what filter brand would you recommend? I hate to have the filter distorts the lens sharpness.

Thanks,

LV

[ebiggs1]

"But it does take all types of folks to make a world."

Shooting the heavens is not the same as shooting for a living.  Two different 'worlds' there my friend.  It isn't the 'hard' glass that is damaged.  It is the lens coatings that is vulnerable.  I totally agree most folks probably clean their lenses and filters way more than they need to. A little gunk on the front element won't effect the photo.  While ghosting can happen it is so rare with high quality filters I really never worry about it.  There again shooting the stars is different.  If in doubt, take it off.

If you like'em, use'em.  If you don't, don't.  But they do serve a purpose.

[RobertTheFat]

My solution to the cleaning issue is to be a CPS Gold Member. That way, I get five of my bodies or lenses cleaned every year.

[ebiggs1]

"My solution to the cleaning issue is to be a CPS Gold Member."

+1 

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"The best  Another way to protect the lens is to attach the lens hood so that nothing can bang the end of it."

Sentence was corrected.  How anybody can say they would prefer to clean the front element of a lens in favor of a replaceable filter is beyond me.  But it does take all types of folks to make a world.

One other aspect to this is, filters remove as easily as they attach.  If you encounter a ghosting problem take it off.  Geez, how hard is that?  With high quality protecto filters ghosting is rarely an issue.

---

Get off your high horse, Ernie. If you have a ghosting problem, you're most likely to notice it in post-processing. What good does taking off the filter do then?

[ebiggs1]

"... you're most likely to notice it in post-processing ..."

Not if you area good photographer and watch what you are doing.  I place this in the category of I'm here to get the shot opposed to my job depends on me getting this shot.

"Get off your high horse, ..."

I don't care for horses, short or tall. 

[ebiggs1]

"I had been photographing a lecture or panel discussion at work;..."

Must have been adults?  The situation is much different when photographing kids events.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I had been photographing a lecture or panel discussion at work;..."

Must have been adults?  The situation is much different when photographing kids events.

---

They were adults, though I have to confess that I'm missing your point. Is it that the kids would have wolfed down all the sour cream dip before I had a chance to get my lens near it?

[ebiggs1]

"...I have to confess that I'm missing your point."

Exactly!  And until you do this for a living you will continue to miss the point.  I have had everything from ketchup to Kool-aid splashed on my lenses.  Everything from Ivan to desert, too.

[Waddizzle]

---

@TCampbell wrote:

The best way to protect the lens is to attach the lens hood so that nothing can bang the end of it.

I "own" UV fitlers, but generally don't use them.  Fitlers create reflections that can result in "ghosting" on your images ... they often make things worse.  If you do use filters, spring the extra $$$ to buy filters with good anti-reflective coatings.

Don't use a CP as a protecting filter... use that *only* when you actually need to polarize the light.  Polarizers will cut a good deal of the light ... substantially changing your exposure.

---

A hood does offer protection against bumps.  But, that protection vanishes as the focal length becomes shorter.  A hood protects a longer lens better than a shorter one.

In the case of my son, who broke his filter while the camera was in the bag when it flew off of the car seat, the hood was mounted in a reversed position for storage, he said.

I agree that if you do not need UV, CP, or ND for a specific shot, then you should use one.

[DanSF]

I just want to add that choosing a quality filter, preferably made with a brass retaining ring is good, so I would not skimp on a filter to protect a quality lens. 

That's because less expensive materials such as aluminum can get bent, especially if you screw in the filter incorrectly.  Then it may become difficult to remove the filter. Or it can stick to the lens through what's called "galling".

The materials such as brass are often listed in the catalog description but if you go to a store or perhaps find a used-one without a box label and can't tell, they are usually heavier (or perhaps you can tell by the color beneath the black surface)