# what filter for my first "L" Lens



## ajd2k8 (Sep 28, 2012)

Good evening all,

i will say hi as I'm not new just this is my first post.

wondering what filters people use to protect there lenses if any... 

I'm really undecided on what type of filter i need i have just purchased the 17-40 L so i know i need a 77mm filter and i know i need a top quality one as there would be no point putting cheap glass in front of it..

so what do you guys and girls do?


any help appreciated.

thanks


----------



## pierceography (Sep 28, 2012)

I'm a big fan of Hoya and B+W. Just put a B+W UV filter on my new 70-200mm. I only use them for protection though, as UV filters rarely improve image quality (IMHO).

Other filters, particularly circular polarizers, are not recommended for wide angles. I wouldn't put a polarizer on anything wider than a 24mm lens. You get some really odd looking light patterns otherwise.

Hope this helps!


----------



## ajd2k8 (Sep 28, 2012)

Cheers well iv just purchased a B+W 77mm UV MRC 

is this good yeah?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 28, 2012)

ajd2k8 said:


> Cheers well iv just purchased a B+W 77mm UV MRC



I have them on almost all my lenses (except the 40/2.8 pancake).


----------



## pierceography (Sep 28, 2012)

ajd2k8 said:


> Cheers well iv just purchased a B+W 77mm UV MRC
> 
> is this good yeah?



Exactly the same filter I purchased for my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM. Would never dream of covering an expensive piece of glass like that with a cheap filter.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 28, 2012)

pierceography said:


> Exactly the same filter I purchased for my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM. Would never dream of covering an expensive piece of glass like that with a cheap filter.



For the 70-200 II, I'd recommend the XS-Pro mount - the standard F-Pro mount causes a slight increase in vignetting.


----------



## crasher8 (Sep 28, 2012)

Same as Neuro, I have these:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11994-REG/B_W_66_070252_77mm_UV_Haze_010.html
on all my lenses sans my pancake. Some of the highest quality glass, great threads and cleans up well.


----------



## expo01 (Sep 28, 2012)

ND grad, polarizer or none.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 28, 2012)

expo01 said:


> ND grad, polarizer or none.



The 17-40L requires a filter to complete the weather/dust seal.


----------



## ajd2k8 (Sep 28, 2012)

neuroanatomist, thanks thats settled me aswell i didnt know if that was the case on this one..

im not a photography n00b just wasted my money on crap equipment, going full frame next year so trying to just get L or better lenses now.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 28, 2012)

I tend to only use filters in situations where the protection is needed. When I do, I have several B&W / Heliopan filters that I use. I also have several of various brands that came with used lenses or I bought years ago when I did not know much about the varying quality.
I have so many that I have a 3 drawer storage cabinet that has overflowed. Probably 100 or so. What suprises me is the owners who have a B&W filter on a old low value canon lens like a 35-70. The filter is likely worth more than the lens.


----------



## crasher8 (Sep 28, 2012)

And that juicy tidbit is the only good thing to come out of selling my 10-22 when I went FF. (I plan on getting a 17-40 and have an extra B+W filter lying around for it.)


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 28, 2012)

crasher8 said:


> And that juicy tidbit is the only good thing to come out of selling my 10-22 when I went FF. (I plan on getting a 17-40 and have an extra B+W filter lying around for it.)


You should lose very little when selling your 10-22, used, they are about the same price as a 17-40. I am not a big fan of the 17-40 on FF, but if stopped down, its fine. Perhaps mine was just a poor copy, it happens. It wasn't bad, just did not seem to inspire me.


----------



## albron00 (Sep 28, 2012)

I'd recommend Hoya HD.
I use them on all my lenses.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 28, 2012)

ajd2k8 said:


> Good evening all,
> 
> i will say hi as I'm not new just this is my first post.
> 
> ...



I like B+W, good quality and easy to clean. I think they might have ones that are different now, but a few years ago for sure, Hoya were a nightmare to clean, some sort of weird surface, if you go Hoya I'd verify that their new ones are easier to clean and make sure to get that particular newer model.

You don't need UV, clear is fine, clear sometimes costs more though anyway.

A circular polarizer can be very nice to have.

Make sure to get all of them with the MRC coating.


----------



## FTb-n (Sep 28, 2012)

I use and recommend the Hoya HD Clear. Nothing against B+W, I haven't tried them. But, I have tried cheaper Hoya's with dissapointing results. The HD series is their best and noticably so. It's easy to clean and, from my experience, no noticible degredation in image quality. I use this filter on my 70-200L mark II and 17-55 (in part to keep dust out).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/648155-REG/Hoya_XHD77PROTEC_77mm_Hoya_HD_Clear.html

One caveat. I have not found a protection filter that I like for my 35. Under some conditions, like shooting birthday cakes, filters add flare. It seems to be a factor of the small diameter curvature of the front element and that it is deeply recessed. Light seems more prone to reflect between the front element and the back of the filter. Of course, the deep recess and small diameter of the front element reduces the need for a protection filter. Add a rubber lens hood and I feel it's sufficently protected. If the lens takes a nasty bump, the threaded hood will help prevent denting the threads of the lens.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 28, 2012)

ajd2k8 said:


> Cheers well iv just purchased a B+W 77mm UV MRC
> 
> is this good yeah?



yeah that's good ;D

If conditions are safe and you are shooting lots of back lit stuff you might want to take them off, especially on wide angles as even the best filters, add more reflective layers and it's a flat bit of glass in front, although it still might not be too bad most of the time.


----------



## westr70 (Sep 28, 2012)

This is an interesting discussion. I have always shied away from buying filters (UV) since so many people say they are a waste of money since the modern lens have their own protection. I'd like to hear more about their value.


----------



## extremeinstability (Sep 28, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> crasher8 said:
> 
> 
> > And that juicy tidbit is the only good thing to come out of selling my 10-22 when I went FF. (I plan on getting a 17-40 and have an extra B+W filter lying around for it.)
> ...



Yeah, 17-40 fine on crop, crap on full. http://www.extremeinstability.com/stormpics/compare2corner.jpg That is F9 corner of my old 17-40 on a 5D II. Center was sharp, so it wasn't the focus being off. Thing made full frame sorta pointless.


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Sep 28, 2012)

A good filter is generally going to cost as much as repairing the front element -- and even the best filters are still going to degrade image quality (even if imperceptibly in ideal lighting conditions).

A lens hood, on the other hand, is always going to improve image quality, _plus_ it offers superior protection to all the most common dangers lenses face.

There are only two scenarios where a filter makes sense for protection. The first is for weather sealing for lenses that require it (and, obviously, only in adverse weather conditions). The second is where you yourself require eye protection: rodeos where the horses are kicking gravel at your face, seaside where the waves are crashing on your head, that sort of thing.

Of course, polarizing and neutral density filters are a completely different story.

Cheers,

b&


----------



## TexasBadger (Sep 28, 2012)

I swear by B+W MRC UV on all of my lenses. They might have a slim mount to help prevent vignetting on the wide end. They are necessary to complete the final lens seal.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 28, 2012)

I have B&W XS_Pro Nano Clear Filter on my lenses. This is great filter, it's so CLEAR....

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/756818-REG/B_W_66_1066111_77mm_XS_Pro_NANO_Clear.html


----------



## crasher8 (Sep 28, 2012)

extremeinstability said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > crasher8 said:
> ...



http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml

and I can find many many more. Is it a copy issue?


----------



## PavelR (Sep 28, 2012)

TrumpetPower! said:


> Even the best filters are still going to degrade image quality (even if imperceptibly in ideal lighting conditions).
> 
> A lens hood, on the other hand, is always going to improve image quality, _plus_ it offers superior protection to all the most common dangers lenses face.
> 
> ...


+1


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 28, 2012)

I stopped putting uv filters on my lenses. I use long hoods for protection. For cpl filter,I have a hoya. It does the job.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 28, 2012)

jdramirez said:


> I use long hoods for protection.



Do you find that works well with ultrawide lenses? :


----------



## Act444 (Sep 28, 2012)

I like the Hoya Super HMC series filters, that's what I use.


----------



## extremeinstability (Sep 29, 2012)

[/quote]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml

and I can find many many more. Is it a copy issue?
[/quote]

Yeah I saw that review before I bought it. I thought it was a solid lens till I went full frame. Could be a copy issue I guess for my corners. There is also this to consider with it.... http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?Lens=100&Camera=9&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=412&CameraComp=9&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

And this comment from photozone.... "I should mention that I've used the lens (another sample) during my film SLR days and at the extreme borders the results were somewhat disappointing below 20mm (full format). "

Both the photozone and lenstip reviews of this lens seem to have been done on crop sensors, which kinda sucks. 

But yeah for sure could be a copy issue. The luminous-landscape version shows a pretty crappy 35mm end, perhaps my lens was "flopped" from that one given my corner was from 17mm. Think I've read more complaints about the lens on full frame than I have praises.


----------



## extremeinstability (Sep 29, 2012)

And as for filters for protection, I'm of the crowd that thinks it's kinda pointless. Any whack good enough to actually fubar the lens will fubar it right through a filter. And it will take a lot of years of lesser nicks to degrade the end to a point it really really matters. All the while you have stuck a flat piece of glass on the end happily ready to at least offer no help to quality. Other than a seal if you plan to use it in a hurricane or sand storm, for protection, kinda pointless. And say you nick the crap out of the end over the years, I can't see it being extremely costly to send it to canon to have that piece swapped out anyway. I use my 10-22 all the time, never ever use a lens cover cause I'll just lose them anyway. Always yanking it in and out of the car and all over. I've managed two little nicks. Little nicks vs a big(relative to the nicks) piece of flat glass. And that's not really ever even trying to be real careful. I do wish I had a filter on after shooting around some sand dunes a bit though. But that is it.


----------



## Random Orbits (Sep 29, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > I use long hoods for protection.
> ...



+1. UW lens hoods are pretty much useless. They don't afford much protection and they take up SO much space in the bag.


----------



## Tammy (Sep 29, 2012)

http://www.lenstip.com/113.1-article-UV_filters_test.html

This is a really great comprehensive filter test/read I found today that I thought i'd share. I was trying to find comparisons of the B+W MRC vs the Hoya Pro1, both of which I use. Debating with myself whether to get one or not for my 24-70 II being shipped.

For UV filters/UV reduction purposes, the Hoyas blew away the B+W's, which surprisingly didn't do very well at UV reduction but did spectacular in light transmission and flare control etc.


----------



## Zv (Sep 29, 2012)

I am also of the school of thought that doesn't use filters on a wide angle lens. Just extra glass getting in the way and you'll need an extra thin kind to prevent vignetting. Sure, the lens hood is crap but for general bumps and knocks it's ok. I had the 10-22mm for 18 months, took it traveling to all sorts of places, up mountains and dusty volcanoes. Damage caused? zippo. Like one post said, if you drop it hard enough NOTHING will protect it!

That said - I would prob slap on a UV filter if I see some rain coming to weather seal it. Even then I'd prob just pack up and go home.

Now the 17-55 f/2.8 - that thing needs a UV filter, the things a dust magnet! 

Z


----------



## FTb-n (Sep 29, 2012)

Hoya HD Clear works great on the 17-55...and, yes, it is easy to clean as advertised.

For those who question whether a filter would actually protect the front element from a blow, consider at least an extension ring. I've seen seemingly innocent bumps dent the threads of unprotected lenses. A filter, a hood (threaded or bayonet), or an extension ring would help prevent damage to the lens' threads.


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Sep 29, 2012)

FTb-n said:


> Hoya HD Clear works great on the 17-55...and, yes, it is easy to clean as advertised.
> 
> For those who question whether a filter would actually protect the front element from a blow, consider at least an extension ring. I've seen seemingly innocent bumps dent the threads of unprotected lenses. A filter, a hood (threaded or bayonet), or an extension ring would help prevent damage to the lens' threads.



Actually...not.

In the real world, something that would dent unprotected threads, if you had a filter on, would jam the filter on. You'd then have an expensive repair to remove the filter, repair and / or replace the filter threads, and maybe even replace the front element if the filter can't be removed without damaging it..

Without the filter, just burnishing out the dented threads would probably be all you'd need.

And, with a lens hood, you'd either have no damage or would just have to get a new lens hood.

Seriously: use hoods for protection except for cases where you need eye protection or weather sealing for certain L lenses in really nasty weather conditions. And, even then, still use the hood. <i>Especially</i> then -- the filter is going to make flare worse, possibly much worse, and the hood is going to cut down on flare.

Cheers,

b&


----------



## Sony (Sep 29, 2012)

People talking a bout B&W and Hoya. I use Tiffens and Canons, are they good, Neuro?


----------



## adhocphotographer (Sep 29, 2012)

I have Hoya HD and B + W filters (UV and CPL). I use them when i'm in crowds etc, use long hoods when appropriate and use nothing if there is no danger... 

The one bit of advice (said before) is if you want to use filters... get good ones! And if you really want to make sure you have the 100% (vs 99.9n% with filters) IQ, just take it off!  Either way, enjoy your new L lens!


----------



## ajd2k8 (Sep 29, 2012)

Thanks i ordered on Digital Rev so it will hopefully be here monday  yay!!!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 29, 2012)

Sony said:


> People talking a bout B&W and Hoya. I use Tiffens and Canons, are they good, Neuro?



Not as good as B+W and the high end Hoya filters. Canon UV are actually OEM'd by Tiffen. I wouldn't use them.


----------



## sandymandy (Sep 29, 2012)

Dont use any filter, problem solved.


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 29, 2012)

sandymandy said:


> Dont use any filter, problem solved.



 Only those rich enough to buy another glass without even hurting his pocket don't use filters and hoods. If you're that guy, then good for you. For most of us, it's better safe than sorry.

Another thing, I only use HOYA and B+W UV filters since they're the best ones available where I'm staying.


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 29, 2012)

B&W MRC UV filters on all my glass. They're superb.

Of course they're are some who believe the lens hood will save they're front element. Its true to an extent, but what happens if you covering a cycling event in which a stone was hurled directly into your front element. Which in my case broke my UV filter but I unscrewed it and continued shooting that day. Yes, that stone would have destroyed my lovely 24L's front element but B&W saved the day. ;D


----------



## Razor2012 (Sep 29, 2012)

B+W XS-Pro on all my lenses...the best.


----------



## Sony (Sep 29, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sony said:
> 
> 
> > People talking a bout B&W and Hoya. I use Tiffens and Canons, are they good, Neuro?
> ...


Thanks! Neuro.


----------



## 7enderbender (Sep 29, 2012)

ajd2k8 said:


> Good evening all,
> 
> i will say hi as I'm not new just this is my first post.
> 
> ...




I put B+W clear (007M) filters on all my lenses. I see absolutely zero impact on the images and they are for protection only. The coating on these is obviously so good to not degrade the pictures and the build quality is outstanding. They don't get stuck in the filter thread like cheaper filters do and they provide a 100% seal.

There is a normal and slim version available. The slim I put on my 24-105 for the wide angle.

UV filters I use only on my film camera. Not necessary for digital since the sensors already have that build in.


----------



## ajd2k8 (Sep 29, 2012)

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-b-w-77mm-010-mrc-uv-sh-filter/p1013323

is this a good one its the one i have ordered?


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 29, 2012)

ajd2k8 said:


> http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-b-w-77mm-010-mrc-uv-sh-filter/p1013323
> 
> is this a good one its the one i have ordered?



Thats the same filter I use on my 50L. Its great.


----------



## 7enderbender (Sep 29, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> ajd2k8 said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-b-w-77mm-010-mrc-uv-sh-filter/p1013323
> ...



I prefer these for digital:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/475494-REG/B_W_66_1001704_72mm_Natural_Clear_Multi_Resistant.html


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 29, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > ajd2k8 said:
> ...



Another excellent choice. I shoot film sometimes so I tend to buy the UV filter. ;D


----------



## ajd2k8 (Sep 29, 2012)

I shoot film sometimes so itll be good for me.


----------



## Razor2012 (Sep 29, 2012)

F-Pro & Digital Pro are 5mm wide
Slim-Line are 3mm
XS-Pro are 3.4
All with front threads except for Slim-Line


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 29, 2012)

Razor2012 said:


> F-Pro & Digital Pro are 5mm wide
> Slim-Line are 3mm
> XS-Pro are 3.4
> All with front threads except for Slim-Line



I prefer the XS-Pro to the slim, the lack of front threads means you must use the slip-on cap that comes with the filter. 

Regarding clear vs. UV, for a dSLR there is really no difference, so get whichever is cheaper for you (it varies by vendor and geography, and by diameter sometimes).


----------



## ajd2k8 (Sep 29, 2012)

Well this is my first L lens so I'm just scared of dropping it .. Never dropped a lens but if I'm going to it will be the L lol!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 29, 2012)

ajd2k8 said:


> Well this is my first L lens so I'm just scared of dropping it .. Never dropped a lens but if I'm going to it will be the L lol!



Honestly, if you drop the lens a filter will almost certainly not help.


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > I use long hoods for protection.
> ...



I have a tulip for my walk around, but it isn't very wide. The 24-105 on a crop is what it is. I'll have to think of what I will do when I cross that bridge.


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 30, 2012)

verysimplejason said:


> sandymandy said:
> 
> 
> > Dont use any filter, problem solved.
> ...



I have an insurance policy without a deductible that costs me 46 bucks a year and it protects my gear if I destroy it accidentally. So protection isn't just for the super rich.


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> ajd2k8 said:
> 
> 
> > Well this is my first L lens so I'm just scared of dropping it .. Never dropped a lens but if I'm going to it will be the L lol!
> ...



I've seen pictures of shattered uv filters and the lens is unharmed... so it can help...


----------



## howwon (Sep 30, 2012)

I do not use any filters on my 70-200 f/4L IS lens. I like using the lens hood to protect the front element.


----------



## EvaCasado (Sep 30, 2012)

If you want to keep sharpness B+W is the only one you should ever buy.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 3, 2012)

jdramirez said:


> verysimplejason said:
> 
> 
> > sandymandy said:
> ...



So you mean that they will give you a new gear if it just had dust or some very minor scratch in the lens even if it's not destroyed? That's great if it is so. Some L lenses needs filter to complete its weather sealing or offer at least some kind of weather sealing.


----------



## Sitting Elf (Oct 5, 2012)

jdramirez said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ajd2k8 said:
> ...



Happened to me with my 24-105L at Disneyworld a couple of years ago. Lens fell off the baby stroller, and the filter (B+W) shattered. No damage to the lens! Of course the people near me were ready to call an ambulance until I realized that only the filter broke!

Dropped lenses.... "There are those that "have".. and those that "will""


----------

