# Filter for L Lens - Hoya or B&W?



## MohaimenK (Aug 26, 2010)

My 70-200 2.8 IS II comes in on Monday and I'm beginning to think maybe I should get UV filter for it? Not because of UV but more for protecting glass. I haven't used any filters for my 24-105 lens but am always super careful w/ my lens and make sure I don't drop it nor leave it w/out cap while it's not being used.  Any opinion on what you guys use and which one to go with? I see Hoya at $70 vs B&W at $88 on Amazon. 

Any opinion would be great!


----------



## Josh66 (Aug 26, 2010)

I personally don't do the 'UV filter for protection' thing, but I won't try to talk you out of it...

B+W is my filter preference...  Every filter I have is B+W ... yeah, sometimes they cost a little more, but at least I know it will be one of the best filters I can get.


----------



## MohaimenK (Aug 26, 2010)

Thanks I haven't used any filter on the 24-105 and knock on woods, no problem. But just thinking, since this is more than twice the cost, should I be a little more careful w/ it? The quality shouldn't change because of the filter correct?


----------



## cfusionpm (Aug 26, 2010)

The giant lens hood it comes with does an excellent job protecting it.  When I'm shooting with it, I will often have it slung over my shoulder with a RapidR strap and the hood keeps anything from knocking into the front element.  As long as you don't have things jetting into the front of your lens, there's really not a lot to worry about.  Plus I hate the idea of having another glass and air element in front of my expensive optics.


----------



## Josh66 (Aug 26, 2010)

MohaimenK said:


> The quality shouldn't change because of the filter correct?


The image quality most certainly WILL change under the 'right' circumstances...

ANY filter will degrade image quality to some extent.  Usually the benefits outweigh the cons, but not always.


I think it would be a good idea to have a UV filter, but I wouldn't necessarily leave it on the lens all the time.  There are certain situations where if would be more beneficial than not, and those are the only times I would personally use it.


----------



## kundalini (Aug 26, 2010)

I use B+W and Hoya filters.......... just that none of them are UV filters.


BTW and not to be bragging, but I have a lot more invested in lenses than you.  I'm just saying that the hood and common sense are all that is necessary for protection under 'normal' conditions.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 26, 2010)

I own a couple B+W 010 clear filters...the quality is extraordinarily high.


----------



## Idahophoto (Aug 26, 2010)

I'm with OIIIIIIIO. Both have great filters and I to don't use UV for protection, but wont criticize you if you decide to. I favor B & W but Hoya is also a brand you can't go wrong with


----------



## Overread (Aug 26, 2010)

I've never used a filter (barring a circular polarizer) on my original 70-200mm nor on my new M2 - I do use the hood though - every single time. The hood has taken bangs, scrapes and more and each time its saved the glass at the front. 

I think that protection filters do have a place, but just not in every day situations - if I were shooting on the beach a lot, in sand and salt spray - outside a rally with mud or in a dessert - then I would say yes spend $/£100ish on a pro end filter to protect the lens - you can wipe it clean quickly and still keep your main lenses optics clear.
Otherwise against bangs and knocks most times a filter is more trouble than help = a dent in the ring can lead to it being stuck onto the lens and a crack in the thin filter glass can lead to horrible glass scratches on the glass underneath. 

So in summary I'll use a filter if its needed, but for general use I find a hood more than sufficient. Further if you go for a filter a highgrade B+W or Hoya should give you good performance with negligible image quality drop. (I use a 2*TC which incurs far more degradation than a good filter and even it still produces very usable results)


----------

