Canon EF Lens - Scratched - Doom?

[Stereodude]

Originally posted by Simon_Howes
quite a few do when on location. High quality UV lenses can actually improve image quality.

Who does it, and how is a UV filter going to improve the image quality? Most larger "L" type lenses can't even have filters put on the front of them because the front openting is too large.

 

[Stereodude]

Originally posted by ozziegn
Thats the first time I have ever heard anyone say something silly like that.

That useless UV filter acts as a barrier between it's $25 cost and the $400+ lens thats behind it.

good Lord, why in the world anyone wouldnt have some sort of "barrier" between the real world and an expensive lens is beyond me.

A few things...

1) Show me a good 82mm UV filter that costs $25.

2) What is that "UV filter" going to act as a barrier against? A typical high end "L" type lens is weatherproof, has dust seals etc, and the front element has a UV coating on it, so exactly what are we protecting against? I think we've established it does nothing in a drop situation. So, you're going to add two more air glass interfaces risking glare, light loss, and haze to keep fingerprints of the front lens element?

 

[ozziegn]

Stereodude

dude, you still dont get it do you? okay, try this:

say you're at a drag racing event and you're shotting photos of the cars taking off at the line. I mean you're right there behind the action getting all the perfect shots.

okay, now say that the next car that comes up to the line and does his massive burn-out to heat up his tires. then, all of the sudden, you feel this little "tink" sound and you dont know what it was so you keep on shooting.

so now you go back to the stands or wherever and you decide to take a break and you put your camera back in your bag while you take a break. but then, all of the sudden you notice a spot on the lens and you try to wipe it off but its not coming off.

hmmm, guess what? that little "tink" that you heard (and maybe actually felt through the camera itself) was actually a small pebble that got shot up from the race car's tire(s) and hit the front of your lens.

and now guess what? your $1,000+ piece of L glass is toast because you were too hard-headed by not using one of them "over-ratted" UV/lens protectors.

yeah, that would definately be reason enough to think about the next time...

but whatever. people are gonna do what they want so its really no use in trying to explain something cuz sometimes it really doesnt do any good. but I'll keep on using my "over-ratted" UV/lens protection and have piece of mind knowing that if/when I hear that "tink" sound that its hitting my lens protector and not my actually lens.

 

[Stereodude]

Gah...

I could get hit by a meteor from outspace too, or maybe struck by lightning. I don't think either is any more likely to happen than the scenario you describe, but hey whatever floats your boat.

 

[Mr_Bucket]

Originally posted by Stereodude
A few things...

1) Show me a good 82mm UV filter that costs $25.

2) What is that "UV filter" going to act as a barrier against? A typical high end "L" type lens is weatherproof, has dust seals etc, and the front element has a UV coating on it, so exactly what are we protecting against? I think we've established it does nothing in a drop situation. So, you're going to add two more air glass interfaces risking glare, light loss, and haze to keep fingerprints of the front lens element?

If you ever had bought a weather sealed L lens it tells you that you NEED to use a filter on it to make it as weatherproof as possible.

 

[Saeculorum]

The lens never focuses on the outer element (I don't think you really need a picture of the front of your lens). It focuses on whatever one is taking a picture of, hence, minor dings and scratches in lenses are rarely a problem. I've seen lenses (even crappy ones) that look like people took sandpaper to them, but still take awesome pictures. There's a bit more flare, but it's a very minor problem.

 

[FLECOM]

Originally posted by Stereodude
Who does it, and how is a UV filter going to improve the image quality? Most larger "L" type lenses can't even have filters put on the front of them because the front openting is too large.

maybe some of the huge primes... but all the L lenses i have seen can have filters on them

 

[Mr_Bucket]

Originally posted by Stereodude
Who does it, and how is a UV filter going to improve the image quality? Most larger "L" type lenses can't even have filters put on the front of them because the front openting is too large.

but they have one built in


the first piece of glass on big L primes is just a flat piece of glass to protect it

 

[Stereodude]

Originally posted by Mr_Bucket
but they have one built in

the first piece of glass on big L primes is just a flat piece of glass to protect it

Yes, I know that and Canon will replace it if it becomes damaged (for a fee). That's how the lenses are weatherproof.

If a UV filter was needed for most lenses it would be there on the lens from the maker. The fact of the matter is some camera stores probably make more money on the filter than on the lens. So it's in their best interest to sell you the filter. Same idea with Best Buy and their overpriced hook-up cables/accessories. Seems they've done a pretty good job brainwashing everyone.

 

[Neb]

from what I've read, you can have actually have minor scratches and nicks on the front element and still get good image quality from it. On the other hand, if you get a tiny big of fungus or mold, contrast simply dies.

as for this thread and the debating, it seems pretty pointless to argue since it looks like most participants in this thread have already made up their mind.

 

[Lethal]

Closed at thread starter's request.