Is it necessary to use UV protector for my 18-55 canon kit lens?

Question

I am using canon 1000D.I am a new user.I need to know if it is necessary or not to use UV protector.If it is necessary then why?what could be harm for my lens for not using UV protector?Pls also help, which lens is good for what type of photo?I mean to say which lens should I use for landscape,which for macro? Is there any lens that covers almost all these things?pls help....

Answer 1

I own one filter. A skylight filter that was on the lens when I bought it. I don't see the point.



I don't touch the front element on my lens and anyone who knows me knows better than to play with my camera equipment.



I am also very careful with my equipment. I have heard of some lenses dropped with a filter on and the filter broke damaging the front element worse than if they hadn't had the filter on there. So, it is a personal preference.



Personally, I prefer not to use them.



And as to one lens that does it all, the tamron 18-250 (about $470) macro is one of few that come close. They have amazing image quality and sharpness for the range of the zoom. It isn't a true macro so it won't give you as great a magnification but can give very nice macro results despite that fact. There is a new tamron 18-270 (about $600) macro too. Here is a link to the review:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_18-270_3p5-6p3_vc_n15/

In the drop-down menu at the top where it says introduction, click on conclusion and samples to see some sample images shot with the lens. Scroll down to the samples heading and click on the first image to go to the gallery. It will tell you what aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focal length and camera used. You sacrifice a little in image quality but the convenience of carrying one lens can make up for it if it is worth it to you.

Answer 2

My old stock answer might be helpful to you:



Many people use a skylight or UV filter to protect the front glass of the lens, but you can also buy high quality plano glass filters for that purpose. Whatever you do, at least buy a decent quality filter instead of trying to get off cheap.

Many people use a UV filter simply to protect the front element of their lens from damage. "UV filters absorb ultraviolet rays which often make outdoor photos hazy or indistinct." (from: http://www.thkphoto.com/products/hoya/gf-01.html )



We get this question often enough that I decided to upload a sample to Flickr showing the same subject taken with and without a UV filter. Download the image, cut a small section out of the top half and drag it to the same section in the bottom half and see what you think. The photos were taken about 15 seconds apart in subdued sunlight, so I think the lighting was virtually identical for each. There was no post-processing at all so you can make a fair comparison. I will not comment any further and let you decide for yourself if there is any color shift.



http://www.flickr.com/photos/7189769@N04/441244796/



The picture was taken with a Nikon D200 at ISO 100 with the Nikon 18-200 VR lens @ 112 mm at f/5.3.



Here's a comparison that I did by accident. Read the comments and you'll understand:



http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/1793551691/



Buy a name brand like Hoya or Tiffen. Don't get cheap junk to put on the front of your fine lens. Personally, I am now switching over to plain high quality optical glass "filters" from Nikon for lens protection, even though they cost more than a good UV filter.

Answer 3

My answer for the two #a million and #2 are a similar. actual, i won't be able to even answer #2 besides as #a million by using fact I don;t understand what your seventy 5-300mm's maximum aperture is and the blurred historic past/foreground is principally controlled by applying aperture ... the broader the aperture, the thinner the sphere of concentration is. it is impossible to help you already know precisely what settings to apply on the grounds that we don;t understand what the ambient lighting fixtures would be like. a majority of those settings (apperture, shutter velocity and ISO) are on the priority of latest easy (or supplemental easy in case you're applying a flash). to receive a shallow intensity of field (DoF) you may shoot very huge open ... at f2.8 or decrease yet it fairly is all i will help you already know devoid of doing a meter examining on the scene you would be capturing in. a good lens for pictures with a shallow DoF it is particularly much less high priced is the 50mm f1.8 ... it expenses around a hundred and forty$ It has fairly sturdy optics for the fee. it is to no longer boot outfitted by using fact the 50mm f1.4 besides the fact that it is likewise 0.5 the fee. handheld photos at evening are very confusing. lower back the 50mm f1.8 could help right here because it could open plenty wider than your kit lens. I shoot im handbook, open the lens as huge because it is going to pass, crank up the ISO till it appears that evidently in simple terms be fore it starts off finding rubbish by using noise and then initiate slowing my shutter till the shot is properly uncovered. you additionally can shoot in uncooked mode and underexpose a tiny bit to objective and shop a speedy shutter and then get better some easy in submit processing. properly, sturdy success.

Answer 4

Use one to protect your lense, of course your lense is a consumer type lense, it is not pro.



Jeff