Was: Noctilux and filters, Now: filters and hoods

[Dan Cardish <dcardish@microtec.net>]

At 11:31 AM 13-06-97 +0200, Harold wrote:
>Hi
>
>I know there is debate as to whether filters are a good thing or a bad
>thing. Personally I have settled for putting Leica UVa filters on the front
>of most of my lenses to protect them. I have, however, avoided putting a
>filter on the front of the Noctilux. 
>
>Has anybody got some experience of the Noctilux with filters. I am
>concerned that a filter may degrade the special qualtities of this lens. I
>am planning a shoot of musicians in some rather dusty venues and was
>wondering whether or not to put a UVa on to stop the front of the lens
>getting a lot of dut on it.
>

Why don't you try taking pictures with and without a filter?  Use a tripod,
try varying lighting situations (backlighting, strong side lighting etc),
and see what happens.  Personally, I have never seen an example of a before
and after picture where the one with the UV filter appears degraded with
respect to the other.  I like the security of keeping filters in front of
my leica lenses, but would like to know if there really is a (noticeable)
degradation in picture quality.

In a related point, I am beginning to question the wisdom of keeping the
somewhat eye-catchy lens hoods on the lenses.  I took some pictures with my
35 aspheric summilux without the hood, in very bad lighting, almost into
the sun.  There was no evidence of flare.  I am wondering how many of the
LUGers actually use or don't use the custom Leica lens hoods.  I am not
sure if a chrome body attracts attention, but those rectangular lens hoods
sure do.  Forget about being a P/S with one of those on your camera!

Dan C.