Lens protection: UV filter or hood, or both?

[paxbc]

I have been reading through a lot of the past threads/posts on protection of lenses in CiC. I have a Rebel DSLR and have just got my first prime (EF 85 mm f/1.8; newborn portraits imminent - I hope!). I am set on buying a UV filter (probably a Hoya 58 mm Pro-1 Digital UV Screw in Filter, as recommended in this forum) but was wondering if there is a need to buy a (bayonet) hood as well, or is this an overkill? I know hoods only cost a few quid but does a UV filter alone suffice? Are hoods necessary, do they add anything extra to a UV filter in terms of protection & reducing glare?

Barry

[Donald]

Barry

You will find varying responses. I think, by far, the majority opinion would say - 'Get a filter and never take it off'. Some folk advocate a hood as a means of protection as opposed to just being a tool to prevent stray light from interfering.

I never conceive of the hood as a protective aid, whereas the it is the sole purpose of the filter that I attach to every lens.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Barry,

Perhaps because all Nikon lenses come with a bayonet hood, I would never dream of not using it*

* ok, there are occasional circumstances when I don't, like on the macro lens when I am trying to get close to a subject, or I am shooting close with the on-camera flash when it would cause a larger shadow.

But other than that, yes, always, why have the lens and filter catching oblique light that can only degrade a picture?

Welcome to the CiC forums from ...

[RonH]

Hi Barry,

... or I am shooting close with the on-camera flash when it would cause a larger shadow.

Ah sweet memories of on camera flash shadows ... must get a proper flash and soon. The 'boss' is watching TV ... now if I go online to ......

[PopsPhotos]

This is a pretty good treatise on basic filters:

http://www.nikonians.org/html/resour..._filters1.html

As for the hood, I don't generally have the hood installed on the lens, but I always have the hood with me. There are times, when strong light is coming in at an angle, when the hood is absolutely necessary, but is not always required with properly coated lenses and filters.

Pops

[Colin Southern]

Hi Barry,

Hoods and filters do different things. Hoods are designed to reduce flare and while they CAN assist in providing somewhat of a "safe zone" around the lens front element, as a protective device, the protection they provide is limited; they won't stop a branch "stabbing" the front element if you're out walking - they won't stop a finger or dog's wet nose - they won't stop salt spray drying - and even if the lens is dropped they usually just "pop off".

So in reality, a UV filter protects against all of these things and - contrary to urban myth - doesn't degrade the quality of images in any detectable way (with the noted possible exception of extreme contrast scenes - eg bright lights at night).

On the other hand, UV filters do nothing to reduce flare.

So short asswer is "use both, unless you have a reason not to".

Hope this helps

[paxbc]

Thanks all for your prompt and sound replies. Will get the hood. Just got my WhiBal card too - must get cracking now eh!

Barry

[execushot]

I prefer both UV and hood if you want to avoid such glare. But if you want a minimum lens protection just buy a uv, it's just enough.

[DTruex]

Get a good UV filter and leave it on. My 28-135mm has been saved many times by having the UV filter on it. Get a Promaster or B&W filter and you will still be able to get most low light photographs without a problem. Cheap UV filters are will degrade low light performance.