Re: Using UV filter for lens protection

In message <478dc5b1$0$512$bed64819@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, monopix 
<nomail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
>"Trev" <trevbowdenAT.dsl.pipex.COM> wrote in message
>news:UbKdnWi_987_ghDanZ2dnUVZ8q6onZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> I have anti virus and Not recived one for years. But Im not going to
take
>> it of.
>>
>Yes, and I have my camera kit insured, but I don't expect to have to make
a
>claim.
>
>The difference is, a filter will always degrade the image to some extent.
>Can you accept that more than the risk of damage. I will accept it if the
>filter is doing some good - maybe to improve the image in other ways or,
as
>I already said, in environments like by the sea, but generally I won't.
>
>It depends on what you perceive the filter is protecting against and
whether
>you are prepared to accept the risk.
>
>
Thanks to everyone who replied. Obviously there isn't one consensus but 
I have given it some further thought.

I tend to be quite careful with my camera and lenses. I haven't managed 
to damage one yet. I'll probably give the filter a miss and just rely on 
the lens hood to give some degree of protection against knocks etc.

-- 
Paul Giverin

British Jet Engine Website:-    www.britjet.co.uk

My photos:-  www.pbase.com/vendee