Need a filter recomendation...

[metakephotos]

I just purchased a Canon EF-S 17-55 lens. This will pretty much be my only lens for a while and I want to take care of it.


So, what filter would put on this lens?





thanks

[Sean Setters]

You can't go wrong with a B&W UV/Haze filter.


I would personally suggest one of these two:


B+W 77mm UV Haze 010 Glass Filter ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11974-REG/B_W_65070156_77mm_UV_Haze_010.html)


B+W 77mm UV Haze 010 (MRC) Multi-Resistant Coating F-Pro Glass Filter ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11994-REG/B_W_66070252_77mm_UV_Haze_010.html)


I have one on every lens I own. I also have a B&W ND filter and a Circular Polarizer, both of which are excellent as well.

[Sinh Nhut Nguyen]

My recomedation is that you don't use filter. I know by saying this I'm going against a lot of folks here, but I don't like the idea of having a $1000+ lens and put another piece of glass infront of it.


You should always keep a lenshood on your lens at all time though, and keep a habit of retracting your lens to the its shortest length.


17-55 lenshood. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/425814-REG/Canon_1244B001_EW_83J_Lens_Hood.html ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/425814-REG/Canon_1244B001_EW_83J_Lens_Hood.html)


You do need a UV filter for special occations like at the beach with a lot of sea spray, under a waterfall orgiving your camera/lens to another person. To me, UV filter is like protective googles,we only wear them when we work with heavy machinery or toxic chemical.

[Keith B]

If you haven't already, buy the hood. The lens caps don't come off my lenses until the hoods are in place. No matter how intrusive they can be I don't shoot a pic without them in place.


Kind of a shame Canon doesn't supply the hood on a $1000 lens.

[Sean Setters]

Well, I'm going to have to differ with Sinh on this one. If you get a high quality UV filter, there's virtually no degradation to the image quality. That's why you don't put a $15 filter on a $1000 lens...


A lens hood is certainly a good idea as well. However, you can buy a cheaper non-canon one like this:


Pearstone LHC-EW83J Dedicated Lens Hood (EW-83J) ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/584563-REG/Pearstone_LHC_EW83J_LHC_EW83J_Dedicated_Lens_Hood. html)


It's the same exact thing for less than half the cost. Truth is, I use both at all times--filter and lens hood. I may be overly cautious, but it's an expensive investment I've made, and I like the idea of two forms of insurance.

[Mark Elberson]

B+W filters seem to be the forum favorite but what about Canon filters? I'm not asking if they are as good as B+W but I do own a few and am wondering if I am doing myself a disservice??? They are not exactly $15 filters but they aren't $100 filters either. I plan on replacing my Canon filers with B+W 77mm UV Haze 010 (MRC) Multi-Resistant Coating F-Pro Glass Filters but after dropping $1k on my latest and greatest EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS I am not exactly flush with cash to buy 3 new 77mm filters!

[Daniel Browning]

I'm with Sinh Nhut Nguyen. *Any* glass surface will increase flare, veiling glare, and sometimes other reductions in image quality. No matter how good the quality is or how advanced the lens coatings, there always be a difference. With high quality filters in low contrast scenes, the difference may be small enough that it goes unnoticed. But even the best filters add flare in a high contrast scene (e.g. with spectral highlights).


If the photograph is more important than the gear, then avoid a UV filter whenever possible.


When one is needed, I like the B+W MRC, to me they seem easier to clean.

[Bob]

Filters on wide angle lenswill soften the edges of the image. Use a hood and forget the filter.

[Dallasphotog]

I like the Hoya Pro1 Digitals. I use the UV and the Circualr PL and have no discernable IQ issues. In fact, I've kicked myself for NOT using the Circular PL when shoointg daytime sports. It really helps too much with color and saturation not to have it installed.