Daylight filter in front of prime

[Guest]

>I really fail to see how this much damage could be caused to your gear within the confines of the planes overhead lockers - surely this must have happened elsewhere??<

This may be true, but surely the point is that the filter protected his lens, not where the damage actually happened?

In reply to Stephen. I also was amazed to see this result. In fact, I was stunned on the removal of the camera from it's bag and to see this damage. I stopped to think for 5 minutes on the history of my travel between the hotel and the airport, but unless my mind went blank, then this is the fact. I might add that I am very protective of my RX and the attached lense. My back-up camera (Aria with 28mm lense) in the back pack was OK.

A comment on Rick Dreher's email. I too use a hood when I feel the occasion is needed in place of a filter, but this does not work very well for a wide angle lense (protection wise).

 

[Guest]

I agree with Rick Dreher about using only quality filters. I used to rigorously use a UV filter on all lenses to protect them. After 50+ years in photography, I now use filters only when I need the effect, or if it's d& weather. I always use a hood for protection. Maybe I've just been lucky, but I've never had a lens damaged. But then I'm not a sports photographer or celebrity snapper. I like high quality lenses and don't really like putting any other glass in front of them, particularly my Zeiss lenses!

 

[Guest]

> This may be true, but surely the point is that the filter protected> his lens, not where the damage actually happened?

Actually no , I think the original point is what precautions one can/should reasonably take to prevent your precious CZ lenses from foreseeable accidents or damage . Clearly nobody would anticipate the posibility of damage to a lens secured within a bag [with the cover on] and all placed within the confines of a solid locker . This is one of those freak accidents you just cant prepare for . To me the only way this could have happened was if someone lunged across from the otherside of the planes cabin and stabbed the bag full force with a spear . ;-) If this sort of thing occurs on your usual airline then I think protective filters are the least of your problems! Steve

 

[Guest]

William , I'm still gobsmacked by this - you would need a longish solid object and enough space for a good swing at it to cause that much damage in that environment!! Clearly we have to ask Contax to start producing solid metal lenscaps - the P filters are no longer sufficient! Steve

 

[Guest]

I would recommend using another airline in future ! The discussion in this thread is getting more and more philosphical, so I use a lens hood and a soft case when carrying the camera and no filter when photographing (for B&W I use filter, of course,but not as a protector).

Matthias

 

[Guest]

William , I'm still gobsmacked by this - you would need a longish solid object and enough space for a good swing at it to cause that much damage in that environment!! Clearly we have to ask Contax to start producing solid metal lenscaps - the P filters are no longer sufficient! Steve

Steve, I can't really answer the question because I don't know the answer.

But to get back to the original question from Jim Cancil, it depends on the photographer's situation. In my case, the answer is yes. I mainly use my camera for city street photography and need some protection from bumping into things and people. I often look for opportunity shots and usually carry my camera in my hand ready and to the side when in interesting places. These are usually crowded. Sometimes there is rain, and I prefer to clean my filter rather than the lense. But if I were in a controlled situation, I may have chosen to leave the filter off. Earlier this year I met a professional photographer in the streets of Paris who had 2 Contax cameras hanging around his chest (I am a keen amateur). I noticed he did not have filters on his lenses and ask him about this. He just replied that there was no point unless he was after a special effect. I also noticed his lenses were marked with scratches and some dust. He commented that these did not make noticeable difference to his photographs. So I guess we all have a different view! Cheers William.

 

[Guest]

Personally , I dont own any P filters despite living in a relatively camera hostile environment[Africa] - I'm fairly careful with my gear and try to be scrupulous about replacing lens caps when not in use . I will however resort to using a UV filter sometimes in particularly harsh environments like deserts or beaches with flying sand , or to protect from salt spray when at the coast or sailing/surfing etc . It would be a relatively simple thing for me as I try to keep all lenses with the same thread size for interchangeability - the only two exceptions being my D21 and my Tamron 300 F2.8 . As the 300 has a filter size of 112mm its just going to have to take its chances!! Steve

 

[Guest]

> testing .... just wondering if my messages are getting through (attempt #3, none seen so far)

 

[Guest]

Lynn you are getting through to the UK OK!

 

[Guest]

For protection purposes, I use Contax filters for my G lenses, and Hoya Super HMC filters (1mm or 5mm) on my SLR lenses (for a while, Delta International had some fabulous prices on those). They are generally skylight or UV filters. I haven't noticed any particular difference in image quality when I've removed the filters, but I'm curious to know what others who have used the good Hoya filters think of them. I like them because they are slim profile, multicoated and relatively cheap. The b+w filters I find to be a bit on the heavy, vignette-causing side.