Well, I was not so sure myself - until I managed to bump a sizeable chunk out of the skylight filter on my 3.5/35-105 SMC Pentax. I had used the filter to correct the bluish cast of the Fujichrome Sensia II. The hood for this lens is useless as a hood or protection. Rubber hoods also give scant protection. My Leica lenses have metal hoods and no filters. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
----- Original Message ----- From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2004 3:38 PM Subject: Re: UV filters on sexy lenses > I've wondered, too, why so many list members use UVs or Skylights > as "protection". It seems to come down to shooting style; some > folks leave lenses out and about while shooting and risk damage. > I've never felt the need for them. In fact, I've poked the glass > out of a few in order to extend rubber hoods a bit more. > > Having said that, next week I'll probably smash the front glass > of a favorite lens. > > Paul Stenquist wrote: > > In truth, there's no comparison. In the shot laeled 29, flare has > > basically ruined the photo. A huge ribbon runs down the middle, the > > trees are muddy and the result is uneven. In 30, the image is clear and > > crisp. UV filters are strictly for amateurs and neurotics. Why would > > anyone buy a great lens and cover it with a mediocre filter. It defies > > logic. > snip... >
