Filters, filter, UV filters Anyone?

[thedutt]

So I am very new to DSLR, and have been torn apart about weither or not to invest in the filters. So far after reading a lot of message boards, this appears to be one of the holy grails of photographsy with strong opinions either ways. These are the themes that I have seen:

1) Absolutely must have them, gotta protect the front of the lens
2) I have been using my lenses for 20 years and Filters are evil (except maybe ND & Polarizing when you need them), they always deterioate the picture. Lens' front element is pretty darn well made, so if you use a hood, and are not in extreme sitations, no need for UV.
3) If you are gonna put a filter on your lens you better be damn sure its really good, multi coated B+H
4) Filters are nice to have, but too expensive if you want to get the right ones, (be prepared to spend $100+ on good filters, and with 3 differnet lenses with differnt sizes the cost gets to be quite high )
I am currently subscribing to #4, what do other feel?

[Jim Victory]

Heres my take on filters. I have one to fit all of my lenses but I don't use them except in extreme conditions ie. blowing sand or sea spray.

I use my hood to protect my front element from knocks and the filters for extreme conditions.

I only use B&W filters.

[Steelsun]

On my Oly C-4000 I almost always had a filter on it (still do). That was mostly because if you ruined the lens, the whole camera was shot, and that the filter was on a barrel that actually protected the lens.

For my SlR I am still looking into it, and will probably go with filters sometimes. If I have a lens hood I probably will not use a filter unless it's for effect.
The downside with SLR lenses is that they are in a variety of sizes. I only have 2 lens right now, and they both have differant filter sizes (52 and 58). Now you can buy only for the larger sizes (more expensive) and have some sizing rings to fit your other sizes, but that is awkward.

Luckily I have a good collection of 52mm Filters to use on my 50 mm f/1.8 so I don't have to worry about that lens.

Filters are good for effects though:
Polarizers: for the reflection/glare and sky/water color effects
IR: for neat B&W or IR effects
ND: for it's various uses
+.2,.4, etc: for closeups

[thedutt]

thats my dilema as well.. the good filters are quite expensive.. all of my lenses are of different sizes. 77, 67, 52, 50! Thats making me want to go the route of insuring the whole purchase as a rider on my home owners and then buying 1 77mm polarizer. btw, i have heard about the sizing rings.. how awkward/expensive are those? If I could by 1 77mm good filter, would it make sense to use multiple sizing rings? (at least the 77 & 67 should be covered for my 17-40 & 70-200)

[Abel]

ive wrestled with this subject when i first got into the DSLR game and have decided to not use UV filters unless it is absolutely in mmy best interest, dusty windy conditions etc.

i havd a b+w cir polarizer and it ran like $130! not cheap and i hardly every use it.. i also have a couple of Cokin P series Graduated filters but very rarely use them...

all in all i dont use UV filters on my lenses. i figure i shell out a lot of coin for the coveted L Glass, i dont wanna cover it up with a cheapy UV filter.. hehe

trust me u will find tons of people on either side of the fence on this one.. so get ready... hehe ;)