Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/11/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hey LUGgers, Based upon the comments of LUGgers whose opinions I have come to respect, I am "going naked" as regards UV filters for the first time in more than 20 years of trying to record quality images on film. My prime motive had been front element damage protection with UV reduction a close second. At the time, I began with a surprisingly dependable, very accurately metered non Leica SLR, I was shooting films that I now believe were simply blue biased, and quality, multicoated UV filters seemed the good fix. I have lived in Colorado, USA for several years [on three different occasions, actually], and we do have an abundance of UV, especially up high. At altitude, there is sufficient UV to blue-cast outdoor photographs on almost any film. Certainly, there is plenty of room for differing opinions on this, but perhaps the most convincing argument I have encountered has come in the form of a side bar note I came across on the web a few months ago regarding a product called Absorban, which is a between-lens-element cement designed [?] developed [?] trademarked [?] by Leica which effectively filters [absorbs?] blueing UV rays. This along with Jim's comments about the durability of Leica lens coatings has convinced me to go without UV filters, and I like to think I am sneaking up on capturing Erwin's higher "percentages" of my lenses' capabilities to make photographs. The logical question emerges about whether I can routinely see the difference, and I would have to admit no, except perhaps a bit in contre-jour photographs, especially with zooms. And admittedly, this is an extreme of an extreme situation, but it is one that occurs with some regularity if one is taking photos out of doors. Naked is good! Enjoy the light.