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

[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 

[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.

[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. 

[Talisman]

I would second that. The B+W 007M is excellent for protective purposes. The only caveat is make sure you buy a genuine one or in other words choose an authorized dealer. There are many fakes out there. You can find Schneider Optics authorized dealers here.

[Tronhard]

Considering the issues of protection, it seems to me that we are looking at the risks of mechanical impact and abrasion from external contact as the two most likely sources of damage to the lens. I don't see the two solutions of a lens hood and protective filter as being mutually exclusive.  I suspect that a lens hood will be helpful with the former, while the latter will be mitigated by the filter.

Speaking for myself, and based on the type of outdoor photography I normally do - scenic, wildlife and travel - I have used both a lens hood and a HIGH QUALITY UV0 or clear filter for the front element.  Let me confirm that I see no point in putting a crappy piece of glass in front of an expensive lens.  A lens hood is a good protection tool, but when not in its extended position - i.e. reversed on the bayonet when not being used, it has limited ability to protect the lens.  This is most likely to occur when travelling.

This was amply demonstrated when on one occasion as I travelled through an airport a security officer was handling my camera and dropped it (in its holster) about a foot onto a hard surface.  I was not able to examing the results until a while later and discovered that because the hood was on the lens it in the retracted position it did not protect the front, which took the force of the fall . The filter was shattered and bent but examination and investigation revealed no damage to the front element and no mis-alignment with the lens.  Replacing the filter was a much cheaper and more convenient solution than dealing with a damaged front element.   I have also had the protective filters abraded by sand, salt and other materials: again much cheaper to deal with the filter than the front element.

So, personally I am a fan of both solutions, depending on the situation and the risk.

[ebiggs1]

"...  investigation revealed no damage to the front element and no mis-alignment with the lens."

Your lucky day!  I hope you held them accountable?

[Tronhard]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"...  investigation revealed no damage to the front element and no mis-alignment with the lens."

Your lucky day!  I hope you held them accountable?

---

Actually not.  I was in a rush to get my flight and the local security guards were not too approachable - lots of AK47s.

[John_SD]

---

@Tronhard wrote:

Speaking for myself, and based on the type of outdoor photography I normally do - scenic, wildlife and travel - I have used both a lens hood and a HIGH QUALITY UV0 or clear filter for the front element.  

---

I do the same. A hood alone in the desert or tidepool conditions is near useless. My lens hood is 3rd party, but my UV filter is B+W. For me, if I had to choose one or the other, I would take the filter every time. YMMV.

[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)