Do cameras actively filter out UV light, or only infrared? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowAre there any downsides to using a good-quality UV filter?Is a UV Filter required/recommended for lens protection?Is a UV filter better for lens protection than a protector filter?What effect does a UV filter provide?is uv filter a must?What considerations are there when buying a polarising filter?Converting cameras for infrared use: When does the filter have to be replaced, and when is simply removing it ok?How do you focus a shot with an IR/UV passfilter?How close are digital sensors to “night vision” image intensifiers?Why don't cameras offer more than 3 colour channels? (Or do they?)Are thermal imagers inherently more expensive than visible-light digital cameras?How much light and resolution is lost to color filter arrays?Infrared photography—why are green leaves not appearing as white?LIDAR burnout; ways to check for damaging infrared lasers before shooting besides looking for posted warnings?Does near infrared AF assist light work with sensor based autofocus?
Is it okay to store user locations?
What is meant by a M next to a roman numeral?
Return the Closest Prime Number
What can we do to stop prior company from asking us questions?
Why do remote companies require working in the US?
Increase performance creating Mandelbrot set in python
Example of a Mathematician/Physicist whose Other Publications during their PhD eclipsed their PhD Thesis
A pseudo-riley?
Is HostGator storing my password in plaintext?
How easy is it to start Magic from scratch?
Why is Miller's case titled R (Miller)?
How to be diplomatic in refusing to write code that breaches the privacy of our users
Grabbing quick drinks
Can a single photon have an energy density?
If the heap is initialized for security, then why is the stack uninitialized?
What makes a siege story/plot interesting?
Removing read access from a file
How do we know the LHC results are robust?
How do spells that require an ability check vs. the caster's spell save DC work?
Opposite of a diet
Was a professor correct to chastise me for writing "Prof. X" rather than "Professor X"?
How to start emacs in "nothing" mode (`fundamental-mode`)
How to Reset Passwords on Multiple Websites Easily?
WOW air has ceased operation, can I get my tickets refunded?
Do cameras actively filter out UV light, or only infrared?
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowAre there any downsides to using a good-quality UV filter?Is a UV Filter required/recommended for lens protection?Is a UV filter better for lens protection than a protector filter?What effect does a UV filter provide?is uv filter a must?What considerations are there when buying a polarising filter?Converting cameras for infrared use: When does the filter have to be replaced, and when is simply removing it ok?How do you focus a shot with an IR/UV passfilter?How close are digital sensors to “night vision” image intensifiers?Why don't cameras offer more than 3 colour channels? (Or do they?)Are thermal imagers inherently more expensive than visible-light digital cameras?How much light and resolution is lost to color filter arrays?Infrared photography—why are green leaves not appearing as white?LIDAR burnout; ways to check for damaging infrared lasers before shooting besides looking for posted warnings?Does near infrared AF assist light work with sensor based autofocus?
I know that a camera has a filter in front of the sensor to limit incoming light to the visible spectrum, to replicate what a human eye can see. But wherever I look on the internet, I always read about the filter in front of the sensor being an infrared filter. Wouldn't the filter also have to block out UV light? I couldn't find any useful information on this on the internet :/ Also, wouldn't an active filtering of UV light in front of the sensor render UV lens-filters useless?
filters sensor light infrared uv
New contributor
add a comment |
I know that a camera has a filter in front of the sensor to limit incoming light to the visible spectrum, to replicate what a human eye can see. But wherever I look on the internet, I always read about the filter in front of the sensor being an infrared filter. Wouldn't the filter also have to block out UV light? I couldn't find any useful information on this on the internet :/ Also, wouldn't an active filtering of UV light in front of the sensor render UV lens-filters useless?
filters sensor light infrared uv
New contributor
Possible duplicate of is uv filter a must?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
Related: Is a UV Filter required/recommended for lens protection? and Are there any downsides to using a good-quality UV filter? and What effect does a UV filter provide? and Is a UV filter better for lens protection than a protector filter?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
add a comment |
I know that a camera has a filter in front of the sensor to limit incoming light to the visible spectrum, to replicate what a human eye can see. But wherever I look on the internet, I always read about the filter in front of the sensor being an infrared filter. Wouldn't the filter also have to block out UV light? I couldn't find any useful information on this on the internet :/ Also, wouldn't an active filtering of UV light in front of the sensor render UV lens-filters useless?
filters sensor light infrared uv
New contributor
I know that a camera has a filter in front of the sensor to limit incoming light to the visible spectrum, to replicate what a human eye can see. But wherever I look on the internet, I always read about the filter in front of the sensor being an infrared filter. Wouldn't the filter also have to block out UV light? I couldn't find any useful information on this on the internet :/ Also, wouldn't an active filtering of UV light in front of the sensor render UV lens-filters useless?
filters sensor light infrared uv
filters sensor light infrared uv
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked 10 hours ago
TanonicTanonic
61
61
New contributor
New contributor
Possible duplicate of is uv filter a must?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
Related: Is a UV Filter required/recommended for lens protection? and Are there any downsides to using a good-quality UV filter? and What effect does a UV filter provide? and Is a UV filter better for lens protection than a protector filter?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Possible duplicate of is uv filter a must?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
Related: Is a UV Filter required/recommended for lens protection? and Are there any downsides to using a good-quality UV filter? and What effect does a UV filter provide? and Is a UV filter better for lens protection than a protector filter?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
Possible duplicate of is uv filter a must?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
Possible duplicate of is uv filter a must?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
Related: Is a UV Filter required/recommended for lens protection? and Are there any downsides to using a good-quality UV filter? and What effect does a UV filter provide? and Is a UV filter better for lens protection than a protector filter?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
Related: Is a UV Filter required/recommended for lens protection? and Are there any downsides to using a good-quality UV filter? and What effect does a UV filter provide? and Is a UV filter better for lens protection than a protector filter?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
UV is annoyingly present when doing landscapes and aerial photography. It records as a haze that blocks the clear view of distant mountains and it veils the land when imaged from high altitudes. A UV blocking filter can be very helpful under these circumstances. The UV filter and a cousin called a “Skylight” filter gained popularity. The “skylight” is tinted pink, so this UV filter also warmed up cool feeling blue-sky type vistas. Special note: The UV filter only benefits when the subject is distant and shrouded by water vapor. Camera store salesmen, eager to pad a sale, generally advised, a UV filter will protect your precious, costly lens. The popularity of the UV thus soared.
With the onset of the digital camera, the need to mount a UV filter diminished because electronic photography raises different issues. The imaging sensor requires trimming with filters or it will fail to deliver a faithful image. The surface of the digital sensor is covered with an array of tiny photosites. These capture the image, but the chances that artifacts with spoil it are high. Most noteworthy is image noise. This is akin to grain in film photography. There are a plethora of these annoying artifacts.
Enter the digital camera’s protective cover glass. The surface of the digital image sensor is fragile, it is covered by a flat glass overlay. This cover glass lends itself to have a dual purpose. Some subject types will image with bizarre results. These are called “demosaicing artifacts, often seen as a moiré. To avoid, the cover glass is also a optical low-pass filter better known as a anti-aliasing filter. This filter slightly blurs fine detail that is finer than the native resolution of the senor. Additionally the cover glass will act as an infrared filter that blocks these frequencies otherwise they will record as false colors
The UV continues to be sold and mounted to protect our precious lenses.
2
Correction: The UV continues to be hyped to protect lenses.
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
UV lens filters in the digital era have a different purpose than actively filtering UV light. They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc. If the glass in front of the lens gets dirty, you are much safer cleaning a $50 UV filter than a $500 lens front element.
Digital sensors are typically insensitive to UV, so you don't need the UV filter to filter it out. Source: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7333331953/should-you-use-a-uv-filter-on-your-lens which says:
However, digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV, so the problem doesn't arise to anything like the same extent.
1
"They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc." Either that, or they are there to give users a false sense of security when in some cases they can actually make things worse. To filter or not to filter, that is the question.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
"Digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV..." mainly because there "generally" is a UV filter in the stack in front of the sensor. A bare sensor without the filter stack is more sensitive to both UV and IR at either end of the visible spectrum than a typical consumer camera that "generally" has a filter stack in front of the sensor.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
2
Disagree on the cleaning. Your front element can take some abuse. Does your filter have as durable a lens coating? Probably not...
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "61"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Tanonic is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106228%2fdo-cameras-actively-filter-out-uv-light-or-only-infrared%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
UV is annoyingly present when doing landscapes and aerial photography. It records as a haze that blocks the clear view of distant mountains and it veils the land when imaged from high altitudes. A UV blocking filter can be very helpful under these circumstances. The UV filter and a cousin called a “Skylight” filter gained popularity. The “skylight” is tinted pink, so this UV filter also warmed up cool feeling blue-sky type vistas. Special note: The UV filter only benefits when the subject is distant and shrouded by water vapor. Camera store salesmen, eager to pad a sale, generally advised, a UV filter will protect your precious, costly lens. The popularity of the UV thus soared.
With the onset of the digital camera, the need to mount a UV filter diminished because electronic photography raises different issues. The imaging sensor requires trimming with filters or it will fail to deliver a faithful image. The surface of the digital sensor is covered with an array of tiny photosites. These capture the image, but the chances that artifacts with spoil it are high. Most noteworthy is image noise. This is akin to grain in film photography. There are a plethora of these annoying artifacts.
Enter the digital camera’s protective cover glass. The surface of the digital image sensor is fragile, it is covered by a flat glass overlay. This cover glass lends itself to have a dual purpose. Some subject types will image with bizarre results. These are called “demosaicing artifacts, often seen as a moiré. To avoid, the cover glass is also a optical low-pass filter better known as a anti-aliasing filter. This filter slightly blurs fine detail that is finer than the native resolution of the senor. Additionally the cover glass will act as an infrared filter that blocks these frequencies otherwise they will record as false colors
The UV continues to be sold and mounted to protect our precious lenses.
2
Correction: The UV continues to be hyped to protect lenses.
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
UV is annoyingly present when doing landscapes and aerial photography. It records as a haze that blocks the clear view of distant mountains and it veils the land when imaged from high altitudes. A UV blocking filter can be very helpful under these circumstances. The UV filter and a cousin called a “Skylight” filter gained popularity. The “skylight” is tinted pink, so this UV filter also warmed up cool feeling blue-sky type vistas. Special note: The UV filter only benefits when the subject is distant and shrouded by water vapor. Camera store salesmen, eager to pad a sale, generally advised, a UV filter will protect your precious, costly lens. The popularity of the UV thus soared.
With the onset of the digital camera, the need to mount a UV filter diminished because electronic photography raises different issues. The imaging sensor requires trimming with filters or it will fail to deliver a faithful image. The surface of the digital sensor is covered with an array of tiny photosites. These capture the image, but the chances that artifacts with spoil it are high. Most noteworthy is image noise. This is akin to grain in film photography. There are a plethora of these annoying artifacts.
Enter the digital camera’s protective cover glass. The surface of the digital image sensor is fragile, it is covered by a flat glass overlay. This cover glass lends itself to have a dual purpose. Some subject types will image with bizarre results. These are called “demosaicing artifacts, often seen as a moiré. To avoid, the cover glass is also a optical low-pass filter better known as a anti-aliasing filter. This filter slightly blurs fine detail that is finer than the native resolution of the senor. Additionally the cover glass will act as an infrared filter that blocks these frequencies otherwise they will record as false colors
The UV continues to be sold and mounted to protect our precious lenses.
2
Correction: The UV continues to be hyped to protect lenses.
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
UV is annoyingly present when doing landscapes and aerial photography. It records as a haze that blocks the clear view of distant mountains and it veils the land when imaged from high altitudes. A UV blocking filter can be very helpful under these circumstances. The UV filter and a cousin called a “Skylight” filter gained popularity. The “skylight” is tinted pink, so this UV filter also warmed up cool feeling blue-sky type vistas. Special note: The UV filter only benefits when the subject is distant and shrouded by water vapor. Camera store salesmen, eager to pad a sale, generally advised, a UV filter will protect your precious, costly lens. The popularity of the UV thus soared.
With the onset of the digital camera, the need to mount a UV filter diminished because electronic photography raises different issues. The imaging sensor requires trimming with filters or it will fail to deliver a faithful image. The surface of the digital sensor is covered with an array of tiny photosites. These capture the image, but the chances that artifacts with spoil it are high. Most noteworthy is image noise. This is akin to grain in film photography. There are a plethora of these annoying artifacts.
Enter the digital camera’s protective cover glass. The surface of the digital image sensor is fragile, it is covered by a flat glass overlay. This cover glass lends itself to have a dual purpose. Some subject types will image with bizarre results. These are called “demosaicing artifacts, often seen as a moiré. To avoid, the cover glass is also a optical low-pass filter better known as a anti-aliasing filter. This filter slightly blurs fine detail that is finer than the native resolution of the senor. Additionally the cover glass will act as an infrared filter that blocks these frequencies otherwise they will record as false colors
The UV continues to be sold and mounted to protect our precious lenses.
UV is annoyingly present when doing landscapes and aerial photography. It records as a haze that blocks the clear view of distant mountains and it veils the land when imaged from high altitudes. A UV blocking filter can be very helpful under these circumstances. The UV filter and a cousin called a “Skylight” filter gained popularity. The “skylight” is tinted pink, so this UV filter also warmed up cool feeling blue-sky type vistas. Special note: The UV filter only benefits when the subject is distant and shrouded by water vapor. Camera store salesmen, eager to pad a sale, generally advised, a UV filter will protect your precious, costly lens. The popularity of the UV thus soared.
With the onset of the digital camera, the need to mount a UV filter diminished because electronic photography raises different issues. The imaging sensor requires trimming with filters or it will fail to deliver a faithful image. The surface of the digital sensor is covered with an array of tiny photosites. These capture the image, but the chances that artifacts with spoil it are high. Most noteworthy is image noise. This is akin to grain in film photography. There are a plethora of these annoying artifacts.
Enter the digital camera’s protective cover glass. The surface of the digital image sensor is fragile, it is covered by a flat glass overlay. This cover glass lends itself to have a dual purpose. Some subject types will image with bizarre results. These are called “demosaicing artifacts, often seen as a moiré. To avoid, the cover glass is also a optical low-pass filter better known as a anti-aliasing filter. This filter slightly blurs fine detail that is finer than the native resolution of the senor. Additionally the cover glass will act as an infrared filter that blocks these frequencies otherwise they will record as false colors
The UV continues to be sold and mounted to protect our precious lenses.
edited 3 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
Alan MarcusAlan Marcus
25.9k23060
25.9k23060
2
Correction: The UV continues to be hyped to protect lenses.
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
2
Correction: The UV continues to be hyped to protect lenses.
– Hueco
7 hours ago
2
2
Correction: The UV continues to be hyped to protect lenses.
– Hueco
7 hours ago
Correction: The UV continues to be hyped to protect lenses.
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
UV lens filters in the digital era have a different purpose than actively filtering UV light. They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc. If the glass in front of the lens gets dirty, you are much safer cleaning a $50 UV filter than a $500 lens front element.
Digital sensors are typically insensitive to UV, so you don't need the UV filter to filter it out. Source: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7333331953/should-you-use-a-uv-filter-on-your-lens which says:
However, digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV, so the problem doesn't arise to anything like the same extent.
1
"They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc." Either that, or they are there to give users a false sense of security when in some cases they can actually make things worse. To filter or not to filter, that is the question.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
"Digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV..." mainly because there "generally" is a UV filter in the stack in front of the sensor. A bare sensor without the filter stack is more sensitive to both UV and IR at either end of the visible spectrum than a typical consumer camera that "generally" has a filter stack in front of the sensor.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
2
Disagree on the cleaning. Your front element can take some abuse. Does your filter have as durable a lens coating? Probably not...
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
UV lens filters in the digital era have a different purpose than actively filtering UV light. They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc. If the glass in front of the lens gets dirty, you are much safer cleaning a $50 UV filter than a $500 lens front element.
Digital sensors are typically insensitive to UV, so you don't need the UV filter to filter it out. Source: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7333331953/should-you-use-a-uv-filter-on-your-lens which says:
However, digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV, so the problem doesn't arise to anything like the same extent.
1
"They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc." Either that, or they are there to give users a false sense of security when in some cases they can actually make things worse. To filter or not to filter, that is the question.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
"Digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV..." mainly because there "generally" is a UV filter in the stack in front of the sensor. A bare sensor without the filter stack is more sensitive to both UV and IR at either end of the visible spectrum than a typical consumer camera that "generally" has a filter stack in front of the sensor.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
2
Disagree on the cleaning. Your front element can take some abuse. Does your filter have as durable a lens coating? Probably not...
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
UV lens filters in the digital era have a different purpose than actively filtering UV light. They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc. If the glass in front of the lens gets dirty, you are much safer cleaning a $50 UV filter than a $500 lens front element.
Digital sensors are typically insensitive to UV, so you don't need the UV filter to filter it out. Source: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7333331953/should-you-use-a-uv-filter-on-your-lens which says:
However, digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV, so the problem doesn't arise to anything like the same extent.
UV lens filters in the digital era have a different purpose than actively filtering UV light. They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc. If the glass in front of the lens gets dirty, you are much safer cleaning a $50 UV filter than a $500 lens front element.
Digital sensors are typically insensitive to UV, so you don't need the UV filter to filter it out. Source: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7333331953/should-you-use-a-uv-filter-on-your-lens which says:
However, digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV, so the problem doesn't arise to anything like the same extent.
answered 10 hours ago
juhistjuhist
665112
665112
1
"They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc." Either that, or they are there to give users a false sense of security when in some cases they can actually make things worse. To filter or not to filter, that is the question.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
"Digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV..." mainly because there "generally" is a UV filter in the stack in front of the sensor. A bare sensor without the filter stack is more sensitive to both UV and IR at either end of the visible spectrum than a typical consumer camera that "generally" has a filter stack in front of the sensor.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
2
Disagree on the cleaning. Your front element can take some abuse. Does your filter have as durable a lens coating? Probably not...
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
1
"They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc." Either that, or they are there to give users a false sense of security when in some cases they can actually make things worse. To filter or not to filter, that is the question.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
"Digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV..." mainly because there "generally" is a UV filter in the stack in front of the sensor. A bare sensor without the filter stack is more sensitive to both UV and IR at either end of the visible spectrum than a typical consumer camera that "generally" has a filter stack in front of the sensor.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
2
Disagree on the cleaning. Your front element can take some abuse. Does your filter have as durable a lens coating? Probably not...
– Hueco
7 hours ago
1
1
"They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc." Either that, or they are there to give users a false sense of security when in some cases they can actually make things worse. To filter or not to filter, that is the question.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
"They are to protect the front element from dust, fingerprints, etc." Either that, or they are there to give users a false sense of security when in some cases they can actually make things worse. To filter or not to filter, that is the question.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
"Digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV..." mainly because there "generally" is a UV filter in the stack in front of the sensor. A bare sensor without the filter stack is more sensitive to both UV and IR at either end of the visible spectrum than a typical consumer camera that "generally" has a filter stack in front of the sensor.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
"Digital sensors are generally rather insensitive to UV..." mainly because there "generally" is a UV filter in the stack in front of the sensor. A bare sensor without the filter stack is more sensitive to both UV and IR at either end of the visible spectrum than a typical consumer camera that "generally" has a filter stack in front of the sensor.
– Michael C
7 hours ago
2
2
Disagree on the cleaning. Your front element can take some abuse. Does your filter have as durable a lens coating? Probably not...
– Hueco
7 hours ago
Disagree on the cleaning. Your front element can take some abuse. Does your filter have as durable a lens coating? Probably not...
– Hueco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Tanonic is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Tanonic is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Tanonic is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Tanonic is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Photography Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106228%2fdo-cameras-actively-filter-out-uv-light-or-only-infrared%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Possible duplicate of is uv filter a must?
– Michael C
7 hours ago
Related: Is a UV Filter required/recommended for lens protection? and Are there any downsides to using a good-quality UV filter? and What effect does a UV filter provide? and Is a UV filter better for lens protection than a protector filter?
– Michael C
7 hours ago