Do you use a UV filter on your lens?

Do you use a UV filter to protect your lens?

Half of me thinks it's a good idea to buy a UV filter to protect my lens, the other half thinks if I've just spent a lot of money on nice Canon glass will I reduce the image quality with a Hoya UV filter?

Yes I do on my Bigma, as there's a lot of open glass to scratch, also on my 70-300 Zuiko, but I have a polarising filter on my little 14-42mm.:)


Perhaps there ought to be an option for other filter, or change the option to UV or polarising.:)

It's more the protection vs image quality issue that concerns me rather than filters per se.

Is spending £40 to protect a £700 lens a good idea?

Also, I don't seem to be able to edit the poll to add "I use another filter".

I have a Cir-Polarizing filter but I find the images slightly blurred so don't use it much/.I didn't find it doing much for white butterflies either.
This is what I have Hama Polarising Filter Circular - 67mm £30.99 - Free Delivery

Mine is a 52 for one lens and I have a Hoya 58 for my biger lens

OK, done that for you.:)

My way of thinking is the filter can be as dirty as anything and the photos are still clear, the big lens acts like a vacuum pump and fills with dust, but you can't see it, as it isn't in focus. I'd rather damage the filter than the front glass, but I do take it off occasionally.:)

That's kind of my thinking although the lens in question is 17-55mm so the dust/ dirt issue may be more of issue at that focal length?

Maybe I should bite the bullet, buy one and test it. But a 77mm Hoya UV filter isn't cheap :(

(They seemed to be the best in this test.)

I've got a Sigma 86mm on my Bigma lens, seems to be a good filter, but have never used the lens without, so may try a tripod comparison shot to see if there's a perceivable difference.:)

With modern cameras there is no need for UV filters, Skylight or absolutely clear filters are ok for protecting the front element of a lens and is certainly worth the investment to save the lens.
I recently had my Sigma lens repaired (I dropped it) the filter was wrecked but the front element was not even scratched.The image stabiliser in the was damaged.
Joe

UV filter cuts through the atmosphire helpful with a long lens, Protection is a good reason for having it, A cheap one reduces the quality of the lens

some years ago when I was fitter I had the 80-400 sigma lens and attached was a UV filter - good job as getting down the steps to board a boat my hubs had an accident and dropped my camera bag inside which was the lens and camera, I didnt realise but the filter smashed and without it that would have been my lens gone for a burton and very expensive to repair or replace - my answer to your question is YES without doubt and NO I didnt notice any loss of quality in my pictures. I was going to the Farnes at the time and I always have a filter on my lens.

I have a multi coated UV filter permanently attached to both of my zoom lenses, plus a polarising filter, in the bag, for both lenses.
Hi to all BTW. I've just joined.