Re: Using UV filter for lens protection

monopix wrote:
> "Paul Giverin" <paul@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:iDZuR0BZxoiHFwSV@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> I'll be taking delivery of a Canon 10-22mm in the next few days.
>> This will easily be the most expensive lens I own. I was wondering
>> what everyone thought of the practice of using a UV filter to
>> protect the lens? I know there may be a risk of vignetting at 10mm
>> although I believe some filters are quite thin.
>>
>> --
>> Paul Giverin
>>
>> British Jet Engine Website:-    www.britjet.co.uk
>>
>> My photos:-  www.pbase.com/vendee
>
> I think Andy has probably summed it up when he said he's never
> damaged a filter. IMHO, it's not worth it. The idea of always fitting
> a 'protection' filter was probably started by the retailers to
> increase their profits. I used to use them until I really thought
> about why I did it, then I stopped and haven't used one for years.
>
> A lens hood is a good idea and also gives some protection from knocks
> etc. Nothing will protect a lens from being dropped. Any dust/dirt
> can usually be cleaned off with a brush or lens tissue. The only time
> a filter might be useful is to protect from sea spray/salt etc. Bear
> in mind that, having spent all that money on the lens, do you really
> want to degrade the image by putting another piece of glass in front
> of it?

I have anti virus and Not recived one for years. But Im not going to take
it 
of.

-- 
Trev
You can always tell a York****re man,
But you can't tell him much.