Will Canon "protect" lenses hurt image quality ?

[mangurian]

Canon sells these and says they can be left on all the time.   Is this a high quality glass ?

Any info on how they effect image quality appreciated.

[Tronhard]

For myself I have a plethora of bags that have, or have not worked for various purposes or equipment.  When I am taking large DSLRs (they all have battery grips) for a day shoot I usually have one holster (either Think Tank or LowePro) which will fit the bulkiest combination of body and lens and then just switch cameras between hand and holster.  Often I just have the other body in my hand ready to go.

I have done some longer hikes with my much loved Kata Bumblebee 222, external frame pack - sadly no longer made. It's super light, has huge capacity and fits like a glove.  It can take up to 3 DSLRs with big lenses, with capacity for a water bladde or laptop, and side pockets for other gear.  It also has capacity for a tripod.

When I am multi-day hiking I am likely to take smaller units such as the EOS M5's one with a wide angle tele and the other with the normal to wide.  They fit into a much smaller bag - I was using the ThinkTank Mirrorless Movers until my cameras flooded, and I now use Tenba bags instead.  On some day trips I can take one of the Tenba messenger bags with 3 bodies (EOS M, and 2xM5's) with lenses, along with other gear not necessarily related to photography.

Finally, when I want to go ultra-light, I can take the Powershot g1XMkIII, G3X and/or G5X bodies.  the G1X has an APS-C sensor while the others are all 1".  They are all great cameras when space and weight are critical and I can fit them in a small Tenba messenger bag or a couple of very small pouch bags.  The G3X has a super zoom and I added the optional EV to it (although that makes the bulk a bit awkward).  It will be interesting to see what the new G5X will behave like.  I actually like the DSLR format of the current G5X, but the new one will be even less bulky.

[Waddizzle]

---

@Tronhard wrote:

For myself I have a plethora of bags that have, or have not worked for various purposes or equipment.  When I am taking large DSLRs (they all have battery grips) for a day shoot I usually have one holster (either Think Tank or LowePro) which will fit the bulkiest combination of body and lens and then just switch cameras between hand and holster.  Often I just have the other body in my hand ready to go.

.

---

Amen to that, once again.  I do almost the same.  This old man needs to have two free hands.  I do not see very well, so I need handrails on stairs, etc.  I carry one camera in a Lowepro holster, and one camera one a Black Rapid Sport.

[Lumigraphics]

I often carry two bodies and seven lenses (16-35L, 24-105L, 70-200L, 18-135, 50, 35; my 100-400L may or may not stay home) and change lenses all the time. I'm not going to let worries about dust stop me from using the lens I need.

And I've been shooting in almost every environment imaginable for the past 36 years. As a working pro, you maintain your gear but there is no need to baby it.

I've never bothered with protective filters over several different systems including 35mm, 645, 4x5, and DSLR. A good quality filter probably won't impact image quality that much, regardless.

[ebiggs1]

" I'm not going to let worries about dust, rain, snow, etc, stop me from using the lens I need."

This is the big difference between a working pro making a living and a hobbyists.  My gear does what I want it to. However, when I was working I sent it in for a C&C regularly. Over the years I have had gear damaged.  It happens if you are putting it to hard work for you. Filters have saved me on some occasions and failed on others but their use is so simple it is silly to not do it. They are mandatory on some Canon lenses, keep that in mind.  Have an issue with one in a certain situation, remove it.  Still very simple.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

... My gear does what I want it to. However, when I was working I sent it in for a C&C regularly. ...

---

Me too. I'm retired now; but I'm still a CPS member, and old habits are hard to break.

But Canon has closed the Jamesburg NJ repair facility where I used to drop my gear off!! I guess I'm going to have to start sending it in, like (I suppose) most of the rest of the world. Any advice for me about what shipping companies are good, what to do about insurance, etc., etc.? Dammit, I feel like a newbie.

[ebiggs1]

" Any advice for me about what shipping companies are good,..."

I have always used UPS. UPS has a basic insurance.  In Kansas where I live a camera sent in for a C&C usually takes a week total.  Canon is extremely good about overnighting it back to me. I know I probably sound like a Canon commercial but I do wish all companies were as good as Canon CPS. They are that good. I can't say about Nikon today but in the past (16+ years ago) they were not even in the running vs Canon for CS and support.

CPS you can send me a check later! 

[Waddizzle]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

... My gear does what I want it to. However, when I was working I sent it in for a C&C regularly. ...

---

Me too. I'm retired now; but I'm still a CPS member, and old habits are hard to break.

But Canon has closed the Jamesburg NJ repair facility where I used to drop my gear off!! I guess I'm going to have to start sending it in, like (I suppose) most of the rest of the world. Any advice for me about what shipping companies are good, what to do about insurance, etc., etc.? Dammit, I feel like a newbie.

---

I have used UPS to ship camera gear for repair, or as gifts.  I always buy insurance, which can cost almost as much as the shipping.  Figure a camera body is going to cost around $50 USD.

[Lumigraphics]

I'm a working pro myself. The only time a filter is required is if you want to guarantee weather sealing. Otherwise my recommendation is to not use them for "protection." And yes I've been in a lot of crazy environments- rain, snow, mud, dust, whatever.

[ebiggs1]

"Otherwise my recommendation is to not use them for "protection." "

Well there you have it.  One pro says don't use them at all and I say always use it unless it causes an issue which is easily solved by simply removing it. Bottom line if it works for you do it if it doesn't don't. You are not hurting or helping anybody but yourself.

To actually answer the OP's original question, "Will Canon "protect" lenses hurt image quality ?" The answer is, no 99% of the time, if it is a high quality protecto filter like a B+W.

[Lumigraphics]

With multiple lenses it can get awfully expensive to buy different sizes of filters, especially high quality filters, and this is a recommendation that wastes people's money.

US$76 for 77mm which three of my zooms use. So there is $228 for filters that are unneeded.