![]() |
IMO, UV filters are only good for protecting the lens from physical damage. If you buy a quality lens to begin with and you take care of it, you don't
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#10 (permalink) |
A True Z Fanatic
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 5,059
Drives: slowwww
Rep Power: 29 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
IMO, UV filters are only good for protecting the lens from physical damage. If you buy a quality lens to begin with and you take care of it, you don't really need it to add additional protection from UV. It's still good to have. A lot of the people I know agree that they'd rather break a $40 filter than a $900 lens. Coupled with a good quality lens hood, its a small investment to keep your lens from being damaged. If you have a cheap lens that yellows easily, why bother. As far as image quality, it makes no difference and may even make it worst if you buy a cheap UV filter.
As far as destroying the sensor, that's highly unlikely. Your lens is essentially a UV filter and very little UV actually makes it to the sensor. It's not sensitive to UV. You're also talking shutter speeds of fractions of a second in bright daylight conditions.
__________________
![]() [09][MB][6-Spd MT][Touring][Stillen Gen III][K&N][Borla CBE][Evo-R] |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DSLR advice | Red__Zed | Photography | 48 | 08-29-2013 09:04 PM |
AUDIO : Bose w/o Nav Upgrades Discussions | Mr_Z | Audio & Video | 14 | 06-24-2013 01:06 AM |
Fluid Swap Discussions | '10Anamoly | Engine & Drivetrain | 8 | 05-18-2012 09:33 AM |
Best Lens for Nikon DSLR? | tmjohansen | Photography | 5 | 01-25-2011 04:54 PM |
Winter Prep + New DSLR | toxik | Nissan 370Z Photos / Spyshots / Video / Media Gallery | 8 | 11-27-2010 05:16 PM |