Went to the Zoo on Friday

[Tfsi_Mike]

Great photos TC 

[Top Cat]

How did you detect he was using one Rich?

It was just a guess if I'm being honest    UV filters can result in odd effects on images (especially in the out of focus areas, resulting in grainy bokeh), so I usually suggest that people don't use them unless its a top quality one or when a lens hood is not available. I don't even use my B+W filter anymore, i just use the hood all the time (which if good practice anyway)

Thanks for the advice. 

[rich83]

No probs.... the 70-200 F4IS is a ridiculously good lens, much sharper than the 2.8IS. *lens envy* Nice to see it being put to good use! 

[Alexander]

*lens envy*

+1!

[RedRobin]

.
Hmm, if you drop a lens (it does happen!) it's usually the first element that gets broken and if you have a filter (such as UV or skylight) then that's far cheaper to replace!

However, it's important to use prime brand filters. So if you have a Nikon lens then get a Nikkor filter - No other will do! You don't put cheap brand tyres on a performance car do you.

A filter also keeps your lens free from inevitable grease, contaminents etc and is easier to clean.

Obviously a lens hood provides some protection, but.

[rich83]

I wouldnt use any canon or nikon filters either. B+W  are the only screw on ones i would use. A lens hood gives more protection than a filter in a "dropped lens" scenario, it will also to a degree cushion the blow to the rest of the lens as it will absorb some of the shock.

Owners of 6000 pound lenses won't use a filter but will always use the lens hood. On my 100-400 I dont use a filter (except a CP filter on occasion) but I always use the hood.

Rich

[Tfsi_Mike]

If it rains i use my hood     *+2 lens envy*

[rich83]

LOL

[Hedge]

I use UV filters but the Hoya Pro HD-1 ones.

Not cheap at all but if you put a cheap filter on expensive glass its like putting cheap, sh!t tyres on your car. 

[rich83]

Hoya pro hd are good. I've got a CP version of that and it's superb.