I have a 28-200mm zoom lens that I wish to get a protective filter for. I've been told that the UV and Sky filters are good for this. Is one better for outdoors than the other? And does it make a difference if the filter is "coated"? Thanks for your time

-- Andy Comstock (FlyingV67@aol.com), July 01, 2000

Answers

The distinction between a skylght and a UV filter is fairly subtle. At extreme altitudes or lighting conditions you may see a difference. Most important is to use the appropriate lens hood for your 28-200. It is an extreme design and a lens hood will help a lot with flare, giving you better contrast.

-- Paul Harris (pharris@neosoft.com), July 01, 2000.

UV filters are colorless, and Sky filters is slightly pinkish that gives a little bit warmer photos. They both stop the UV-lights that can cause a little haze on the pics, especially needed at higher altitudes or at sea, and can be used with both color and B/W films. As they can be used at all times, many have them to protect the lens. Most filters today are coated. Hoya is a good brand. B+W is the BEST, but cost a bit more.

-- Patric (jenspatric@mail.bip.net), July 01, 2000.

If you want to protect your lens, only use a filter when it serves some photographic purpose. Using one to "protect the lens" is camera store talk. Yes it wil keep fingerprints off, but a little care will do the same thing. If a camera is dropped, has a filter on it and hits on the lens some bad thigs are likely to happen: 1. filter breaks and scratches the surface of the lens. 2. filter breaks, and the ring is bent to the point of not being able to be removed from the lens 3. Evenif not dropped, it is not uncommon for the filter to become jammed on the lens and non-removable to place a useable filter on the lens.

If you want to protecxt your lens, get a good screw-in METAL lens hood and always use it. If camera is dropped on the hood it may bend, but usualy will not harm the lens in any manner. Also your images will be improved by the elimination of lfare by the lens hood. Good Luck, Jim

-- Jim Noel (jimnoel@att.net), August 29, 2000.

With due respect to Jim Noel, I strongly recommend keeping a UV filer on a lens for protection. I have thrown out two UV filters this year that gave their lives protecting the front element of very expensive lenses. One, a 24mm Cannon FD, still needed to be repaired because the front element was pushed in a bit after my 17 year old dropped it, but the repair was less than half of the cost of replacing the lens. Without the filter, the lens would have been lost. The second filter was broken by the same 17 year old (there is a lesson here, too), but no lens repair was needed. Plus, I am much more relaxed about cleaning a readily replacable filter than I would be cleaning the front element of an expensive lens. From my experience, there is no question but every lens should have a protective filter.

-- Lee Goodwin (lgoodwin@thelenreid.com), September 07, 2000.