Art and Photography

UV Filters for Lenses Advice Needed

  • Last Updated:
  • Jul 2nd, 2020 10:00 am
[OP]
Sr. Member
Aug 5, 2007
642 posts
91 upvotes

UV Filters for Lenses Advice Needed

Hi Everyone,
I'm looking to purchase a couple UV filters for my lenses (77mm and 82mm, both zoom lenses). Any advice on what brands or what I should be looking for? I purchased a B+W 49mm for another lens (prime) and have been happy with it but the same ones for 77mm and 82mm are $78 and $105 respectively.

I don't mind spending that money if it's worth it, but thought I would ask to see what others are using and if there are other filters that are less expensive but still good quality. I saw some bad reviews for the cheap AmazonBasics filters saying they add a harsh glare in certain situations.

Any advice is appreciated!

Thanks!
16 replies
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
14556 posts
7458 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
The issue really is that anything you put in front of the lens will degrade the image quality - even the best glass will create a little degradation of the image. So, the question would be - how much degradation are you willing to live with? I'm assuming that if you are looking at 77mm and 82mm filters that both lenses are fairly long/kind of fast zooms and if that's the case, then it pays to put a good filter on it if you are going that way.

Possible alternatives are the higher end Hoya (pro-1digitals not their cheapo stuff) or Sigma filters.
[OP]
Sr. Member
Aug 5, 2007
642 posts
91 upvotes
craftsman wrote: The issue really is that anything you put in front of the lens will degrade the image quality - even the best glass will create a little degradation of the image. So, the question would be - how much degradation are you willing to live with? I'm assuming that if you are looking at 77mm and 82mm filters that both lenses are fairly long/kind of fast zooms and if that's the case, then it pays to put a good filter on it if you are going that way.

Possible alternatives are the higher end Hoya (pro-1digitals not their cheapo stuff) or Sigma filters.
You're right, the 24-105 f4 takes 77mm and the 16-35 f2.8 takes the 82mm (both Sony). I looked up the Hoya pro 1 Digitals and they are cheaper than the B+W (about $130 together for both for the Hoya) so that might be a great option. I don't mind spending more if the quality gets me that, I just wasn't sure if its worth it. I appreciate your response, thank you!
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
14556 posts
7458 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
drunag wrote: You're right, the 24-105 f4 takes 77mm and the 16-35 f2.8 takes the 82mm (both Sony). I looked up the Hoya pro 1 Digitals and they are cheaper than the B+W (about $130 together for both for the Hoya) so that might be a great option. I don't mind spending more if the quality gets me that, I just wasn't sure if its worth it. I appreciate your response, thank you!
The only thing about the Hoya filters over the B+W filters is that the Hoya can be hard to keep clean. Most of my filter stock is B+W with the odd Hoya and I've found that the Hoyas are much harder to keep clean.
Deal Addict
Jul 13, 2009
4174 posts
2261 upvotes
B+W = worth it
Hoya Pro 1 Digital if you can't afford the difference.

Great for resale value.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
14556 posts
7458 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
bhrm wrote: B+W = worth it
Hoya Pro 1 Digital if you can't afford the difference.

Great for resale value.
Speaking of resale, used filters can typically be had for a good price... just be careful about fakes.
Deal Addict
Nov 24, 2013
1084 posts
544 upvotes
Toronto
I used B+W exclusively, but have now decided that filters are unnecessary unless using the lens in extreme conditions like blasting sand or dirt.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
14556 posts
7458 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
lpin14 wrote: I used B+W exclusively, but have now decided that filters are unnecessary unless using the lens in extreme conditions like blasting sand or dirt.
I still use filters especially if I'm travelling or expecting to change lenses quickly as I don't have to be as careful when I'm changing lenses - ie fewer worries about getting oils or suntan lotion on the front element as if I do accidentally get something on the lens, it's probably on the filter which I can unscrew, shoot on, and then clean the filter at a later time when I have more time.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Nov 15, 2009
1211 posts
342 upvotes
I haven't touched photography in long time so I am way outdated. The filter I was considering back then was Pink Enhancing Filter. I can't remember the manufacturer name but it might have been Tiffen.

https://www.amazon.ca/Tiffen-52EF1-52mm ... 9UTNZ?th=1

They are probably out of stock but you can look elsewhere. Basically it's a color saturation filter for nature lover.
Last edited by MasterMK on Jun 29th, 2020 1:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Deal Addict
Sep 3, 2005
3052 posts
702 upvotes
Vaughan
When i first started shooting, i bought the higher end hoya filters. At the time, those filters were rated on most websites to be one of the top UV filters. Now, i don't even use filters. I found even the best filters will cause some form of degradation to the image quality.

I haven't used any filters for the last 10 years or so. I haven't seen damage to any lenses i've own. I use my camera in all sorts of conditions. I've been to egypt with blowing sand. I've shot in the rain. I've used my lenses in harsh conditions.

Tbh, i'm on the side that doesn't believe in UV filters, no matter how expensive. The front element on lenses today are built pretty tough to withstand nature. The coatings help for sure.

I won't tell not to use UV filters, because if you believe in them, then thats your opinion. If you do want to use UV filter, buy the expensive ones, and not cheap ones. Breakthrough is a company that makes great filters.

The only filters i use are a cpl, and 10 stop ND.
For Sale

Nothing at the moment
Jr. Member
Jul 14, 2008
173 posts
358 upvotes
another brand I used to pick up for my lens is Heliopan. had a few of their filters ranging from the UV to the ND. great glass.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
14556 posts
7458 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
hassy wrote: another brand I used to pick up for my lens is Heliopan. had a few of their filters ranging from the UV to the ND. great glass.
I agree Heliopan has great glass but it's not cheap!
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Sep 21, 2007
5109 posts
495 upvotes
Winnipeg
I only use a filter if the lens costs more than $1000 retail value.
"An essential aspect of creativity is not being afraid to fail." -- Edward Land
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
May 11, 2009
5237 posts
1936 upvotes
Debtario
Lens hood > UV filters, unless you expect stuff to come flying at you at high speed

IMHO it's a waste of money, your lens already has superior glass and coatings, a filter is another unnecessary glass element that will add flare no matter what, it's physics.
"I possess a device, in my pocket, capable of accessing the entirety of information known to man. I use it to look at pictures of cats and get in arguments with strangers"
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
14556 posts
7458 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
M1K3Z0R wrote: Lens hood > UV filters, unless you expect stuff to come flying at you at high speed

IMHO it's a waste of money, your lens already has superior glass and coatings, a filter is another unnecessary glass element that will add flare no matter what, it's physics.
I believe its really a question of what and how much you are willing to risk. Absolutely agree that anything between the sensor and the object will add some level of distortion - even the elements in the lens itself. The question is - how much control you have in the environment you are shooting in and how much care do you/can you take with your equipment in that environment vs the relatively tiny loss in image quality? For example, shooting in a studio with all of the time in the world vs shooting in an action type environment where quickness is required vs shooting on the beach next to the ocean.

Top