Sony A7 IV Lens protective filters

[rnrlon]

Can anyone point me to the best lense protective filters for A7IV?
thanks

 

[spudhead]

No to filter unless it is for nd or effect

 

[iain clyne]

I’m another one that wouldn’t put a filter on my lens.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

On another note. Do not use a hood either..!

 

[Gaz]

I’ve used Hoya filters for years. The good thing about them is, you can scratch the heck out of them with a dusty shirt at a moment of insanity, and if you do, just throw it away and get another one. Or, throw away a scratched lens.

Also, leave the hood intact to help keep dirt off it.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Never use one, superfluous in this day and age anyway. Also, if you are thinking of putting it on the 200 600 it has been well documented that it causes back focussing issues.
Use the hood, always, despite our Aussie friends insistence on not (Hi Clint) and that is plenty good enough.

 

[iain clyne]

I have always used a lens hood, it in its self acts as protection for the front element as I have unfortunately proved on two occasions.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Never use one, superfluous in this day and age anyway. Also, if you are thinking of putting it on the 200 600 it has been well documented that it causes back focussing issues.
Use the hood, always, despite our Aussie friends insistence on not (Hi Clint) and that is plenty good enough.

Hi...

 

[cjsmall]

Well, just to be the contrarian I just spent a month in Europe and while walking on a narrow cobblestone sidewalk, I slipped and fell. The front edge of my camera lens touched the pavement and the UV filter took the ding and cracked but the Sony 20-70mm lens was unharmed. So the loss of the $50 filter was a small price to pay for saving the $1,200 lens! I always keep a UV filter on all of my lenses.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Now see this is where I question people's logic. It is a precision instrument. A good sized shock is the worst possible thing that could happen to it. There are parts inside that all have to line up within tiny tolerances in order for it to work the way it was designed to.

I just really cannot comprehend how anyone could shock such an item to the extent of a proper fall then make a claim that it is fine and unharmed as it is basically impossible. The slightest warp or movement in either side of the chassis or the tiniest twist of any one of the many optics inside means that it no longer views information as accurately. Do people understand this..?

Same as the baseball guy the other day. Nothing was saving that lens. Even if it miraculously didn't smash the glass after hitting a lens hood, there's no way the insides of that lens could be fine after receiving such shock from a flying baseball.

I won't deny that a lens hood or protective filter is great if you have a tendency to rub against things or if you are working in non ideal conditions. But these are absolutely useless in protecting your lens against shock where the internal damage is the main factor of concern.