Re: [Leica] Filters, again, very long.

["Hans Pahlen" <hans@komvux.skola.mark.se>]

Jim,
A few years ago I saw a German dealer demonstrating the Leica Mini for a
customer. He took a coin, and rubbed it over the lens surface. Nothing was
damaged, no scratches whatsoever!
However, my old brain never concluded that the coating would be as resistant
on my own M-lenses...

Now your message started me thinking, and I figured out that my own
UV-filter habits come from an old photomagazine article (30 years ago...),
and since then I have taken it for the truth.
Well, your 'anti-filter campaign' started my old brain to do some more
thinkning, and I will admit that I think you are right. I will put my
filters in the cupbouard!

/Hans


>I know I'm going to get all kinds of dissenting comments on the following.
>But it is the truth, collected from 50 years of photographic experience and
>reading available literature. Especially Leica literature. So go ahead and
>tell me I full of it. I don't care. It's my experience and I'm simply
>passing it along. Do with it what you wish.
>
>For some unknown reason, people fail to understand that Leica says "use a
>filter for specific purposes only" "a filter can and will cause flare and
>ghosting" "do not allow bright/contrasty or stray direct sunlight hit the
>filter." This is why they put UV inhibitor in the glue... SO YOU DON'T NEED
>A UV FILTER ON THE LENS. Leica does not recommend filter use if there is NO
>USEFUL REASON.
>
>Using a UV filter as protection is silly. What part of the entire surface
>of your camera, is the lens glass itself. Typically, a very small
>percentage. Now how, prey tell, can you bash ONLY THE GLASS OF YOUR LENS,
>without taking out the rest of the front of your lens. How often does
>something stick itself exactly in the lens opening and hit just the glass.
>Looking at your camera overall, the chances of bashing the camera, the
>pentaprism, the rangefinder, basically the camera itself, is far greater
>than having something zero itself in, precisely on the lens glass. If you
>are going to bash your lens, believe me, it won't be a dead center hit! If
>it hit hard enough to break or badly scratch the front element, you've got
>bigger problems than just the glass. So protect your camera. And use a lens
>cap.
>
>There have been far more cameras bashed, than front elements (with no other
>damage) bashed. Put a filter on your lens and bash the filter. Chances are
>you'll take out the filter threads and bend the front part of the lens.
>
>
>Some people say that they are protecting the front element against bad air.
>Well... a filter in not hermetically sealed. Bad air is in the camera, on
>the rangefinder mirrors, on the SLR pentaprism and mirror, on the lens,
>front and back. You cannot keep it away from your lens with a filter. Ocean
>spray? Well, if you are going to use a filter, use a polarizer, and get
>that deep blue sky & water, and super white waves and sails. Or no filter.
>Salt water on that precious front lens element? I'd rather have it there
>than on my camera mechanics. The f-stop ring. Under the shutter speed dial.
>Etc... It's really easy to clean off of the lens. Some ROR and a
>micro-cloth. But the camera??? Much more difficult.  And for that utmost
>precious glass, like the 15mm Super Elmar R, or 19mm R, there are NO FILTER
>THREADS. UV junkies need not apply. One must use the intended protection. A
>lens cap.
>
>In reality, your front lens element is one of the most already protected
>part of your camera. Instead of destroying that really super multicoated
>lens that Leica spent years and millions developing, with a dumb UV filter,
>I urge you all to let your front element do what it was designed to do. Be
>the first piece of glass to kiss those image forming light rays. But by all
>means, use a filter if you have a GOOD PHOTOGRAPHIC REASON. But wait...
>since your camera is far more vulnerable than the glass down inside the
>lens barrel, already protected by a lens shade, what you all really need is
>a nice big never-ready case, surrounding and protecting that precious
>camera from sticks and stones and yucky mucky air.
>
>Why do I persist with this thread? I believe people should know the truth.
>Use a filter, go to jail. It's the law. NO NO NO... just kidding. I'm a big
>fan of using filters. Real filters. FOR REAL PHOTOGRAPHIC PURPOSES.
>Polarizer, KR3, KR6, 4xND, ND grads, color grads. You've gotta admit that,
>without speaking, Leica is telling you something when they put UV inhibitor
>in the lens glue AND a couple of their most expensive lenses have no filter
>threads. Ever see a 15mm Super Elmar R up close? I have one and the bulbous
>front element not only sticks way out, but swamps the entire front of an R
>camera in size. Now if a front lens element is vulnerable for whacking...
>this is the one. So I use my trusty lens cap when not shooting.
>
>The bottom line is... when you have a filter on your lens, pay special
>attention to what is in front of the lens. The time of day, etc. At night,
>bright lights will cause ghosting. During the day, stray sun rays will
>cause flare. All of this is easy to see with an R camera. But with an M,
>well... you cannot see the filter effect and you are probably shooting,
>hand held, subjects that are all over the place. I don't have any filters
>for my M2 and really don't think I'll get any. But if you do use a filter
>on your M camera, pay special attention where you point it.
>
>OK... I'll shut up now. And I won't respond further. I'm old and tired. And
>said enough.
>
>Good night,
>
>Jim "no UV" Brick
>
>