A UV filter is basically just good for protection of the front lens element. I'm not a fan of full time front lens element protection myself (just when rain, sand, or other elements are part of the surroundings), but many take comfort from them..
You might want to get a circular polarizer, though. For sunny days they reduce reflective glare (leaves, windows, water) and that can help boost color saturation a bit. The drawback is it reduces the amount of light entering the lens, so you'd want to remove it when it is not needed. The thing is, a CP's effects are one that cannot be duplicated with post processing or mulitple exposure blending techniques. So that's the one filter to have, if you get no other..
...Bob, NYC.
Http://www.pbase.com/btullis.
You'll have to ignore the gallery's collection of bad compositions, improper exposures, and amateurish post processing. .
Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..
Like Bob Tullis said, the basic reason to use a UV filter is if you feel that it is protecting the front glass of your lens. On most modern lenses, the front glass is itself a protective glass, so it all seems redundant to me..
It's a religious thing. Some people can't imagine taking a lens out of the case without a filter on the front to protect it, and others (like me) can't imagine sticking more glass into the optical system to protect the protection. Whichever way you want..
Regardless, be aware that (at least in the US) Canon brand filters are pretty poor. I wouldn't recommend using that brand. If you're going to stick a filter on your lens, at least make it a coated or multicoated filter. Hoya makes some nice multicoated filters (they also make some cheap uncoated ones), and for a bit more you can get B+W brand...
The easiest way to protect the front lens element from unwanted knocks - which is all such a filter is really for - is simply to keep the lens hood fitted.Mike..
To expand on what has already been said, you dont optically need a UV filter. Film was sensitive to UV and most people used either UV or skylight filters for outdoor shooting with film. For digital it's only effect is to protect the lens..
Many people use UV filters as lens protection. They say it is a lot cheaper to replace the filter than to replace the lens. Im of the school that you dont want any more air/glass surfaces between your scene and the sensor than are absolutely necessary..
The suggestion to leave the lens hood on is a very good one. Not only does it protect the lens, but a good lens hood is the one piece of auxiliary equipment that really improves your photography..
Lens coatings arent as fragile as some people seem to think. I date back to when you carried an exposure meter because the cameras didnt have one built in. I have yet to damage the coating on a lens. I have a pair of Nikon sunglasses with a multiple later lens coating on the inside. My eyebrows tend to oily up the inside of sunglasses, so they get washed daily with hand soap and dried with a Viva paper towel. After two years of nearly daily cleaning the lens coating is still perfect.
I wouldnt bother with a polarizer for Disney World...
I use filter all the time for outdoor shot. If no need for polarizer of gradual neutral density, I always put on a UV or a skylight filter during the day. I've noticed it's always dusty ourdoor, and a filter keeps the lenses cleaner. More frequent cleaning on the filter, less cleaning on the lense, less chance of scratch on the lense..
For indoor, I don't need the extra layer..
Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.
- Pro freelancer taking assignments in sports, concert and any events, especially fun assignments.
- Daughter asked Mom: 'Is dad a full time photographer now? Does he still have his old job?'http://SoCalConcerts.PhotoReflect.com/http://AndreTorng.PhotoReflect.com/..
Personally I'd only stick a UV filter on a more expensive lens and then I'd buy a quality uv filter..
What you see a lot these days is that people take a mediocre lens, such as a Canon 18-55 and stick a cheap UV filter in front of it thereby further degrading picture quality..
On a cheap lens such as a nikon 18-55 I've thought about it. Am I going to spend about half of what a used replacement copy will cost on a uv filter? And run an increased risk of flaring and all sorts of nasty things? OR just take the risk.Don't wait for the Nikon D-whatever, have fun now!http://www.flickr.com/photos/j_wijnands/..