• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Canon 100-400 uv filter? (1 Viewer)

B

BackGardenMoths

Well-known member
Just purchased my 100-400mm lens but didn't buy a UV filter. Can you advise as to whether I really need to use one. I'd hate to ruin my lens but I have heard that the image quality goes down with one fitted. Not much point in spending the money is there's no gain, so I would appreciate your advice,

Simon
 
I Agree with all the above, That said if your going were salt spray might hit the lens Get one just for that.
Rob.
 
Handy for windy days and any mud, grit, sand etc and as mentioned above salt spray, definitely easier to clean than the actual lens.

Save your money for the repair when the zoom friction cardboard/paper device fails which seems to be a fairly common problem with these lenses. Know that sounded harsh, but might be a good idea to check out ways of putting the least stress on that function as its less than robust.
 
Don't say that !!! After much debate and many postings here I went for the zoom over the 400mm prime... Lets hope it doesn't let me down. anyway, I've had it a few weeks and still wrap it up in bubble wrap after wards so I think I probably treat it very well :)
 
Well, you certainly don't need one, but I'm glad I had one on the end of my lens when it got bumped and shattered the filter and not the front lens element.

Just saying.

BTW I use B+W filters. Not the cheapest, but I haven't seen any degradation in quality either.
 
mrmarklin said:
Well, you certainly don't need one, but I'm glad I had one on the end of my lens when it got bumped and shattered the filter and not the front lens element.
Click to expand...
Did you not have the lens hood on? That's stopped everything that might otherwise have threatened the front element on my 100-400mm...
 
mrmarklin said:
Well, you certainly don't need one, but I'm glad I had one on the end of my lens when it got bumped and shattered the filter and not the front lens element.
Click to expand...

Wow! You were lucky. Lucky that those thousands of shards of glass didn't scratch your lens. Just because a bump shattered the thin piece of glass in front of the filter doesn't mean it would have done anything at all to the thick chunk of glass that makes up thte front element.
 
Huntso said:
I deliberately mentioned it so you were aware of a potential issue and could possibly take steps to lessen any impact
Click to expand...
So you don't think that comments like:
Save your money for the repair when the zoom friction cardboard/paper device fails which seems to be a fairly common problem with these lenses
Click to expand...
And
Know that sounded harsh, but might be a good idea to check out ways of putting the least stress on that function as its less than robust
Click to expand...
might run the risk of scaring the beejeezus out of Simon (which is apparently just what happened)?

Even in the thread you linked to, most contributors (including me) are are pains to make it clear that it's not a particularly common problem, and hardly a show-stopper even if it does happen.

Let's keep a sense of proportion about it.
 
What makes me chuckle is that I fairly regularly shoot in conditions like those in the attached images, without a filter, and my 100-400mm is as sound now as it is was in 2007 when I shot these!

(These aren't faked - that's real sand being blown about by a 40 mph wind!)
 

Attachments

  • 481.jpg
    481.jpg
    189.8 KB · Views: 510
  • 480.jpg
    480.jpg
    211.4 KB · Views: 497
Had mine 5 years no problem apart form when i first got it and put a uv filter on and nearly sent the lens back it was so bad , the filter was a hoya pro digital one , wasn't a cheap one and when i took it off and tried it the lens was great so i'll never put one on mine again i also use it all over and weather conditions.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

H
dead canon 7dm2 and dead sigma 100-400...what next?
Replies
3
Views
1K
HouseCrow
H
S
Switching to mirrorless from Canon D80 + 100-400 II
Replies
3
Views
2K
birdboybowley
birdboybowley
M
Canon EF 75-300mm IS USM Mark I or Canon EF 70–300mm f/4–5.6 IS USM
Replies
0
Views
628
MarkBC
M
H
same quest, new question: which to pick? 2nd hand 7dm2 + EF 100-400 mk2 OR R7 + EF 100-400 mk1
Replies
19
Views
2K
Richard G
R
S
Canon R7 - settings for moving/soaring birds
Replies
7
Views
1K
Mendobirder
Mendobirder

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top