Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/09/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Filters
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@ponyexpress.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 19:21:46 -0500

At 08:37 AM 9/23/97 -0700, you wrote:
>At 05:45 AM 9/23/97 -0700, you wrote:
>expensive, multicoated, meticulously designed lens. As Leica said a number
>of years ago "If we had wanted a piece of glass in front of our lenses, we
>would have designed it there. But we don't and we didn't." I believe I

Actually, they did. The 280 2.8 Apo Telyt came with a UV filter, and the
instructions said that there is no degradation of image quality except in
strong backlighting situations, where they recommended it be removed.

On very good place to put a UV filter on your lens is at the beach. The
salt air can attack your lens element. Also per Leica recommendations I've
read.

I can think of a few other shooting situations. Like when you're low to the
ground and there are kids or dogs in the vicinity. They like to put their
tongues, noses and dirty fingers/paws on lenses.

I have dropped a 90 Summicron twice, once on cement and once on a wooden
floor. Both times it landed front element down (if it was a sandwich, it
would be jelly side down). It nuked the UV filters (yes, I use them on
occasion) and both times the lens came through perfectly. Once a 180
Elmarit (late) landed filter first, and the filter shattered and scratched
the front element. I can't tell you how bad that made me feel! Life it not
easy. Answers sometimes aren't either.

=============
Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO

Consciousness: that annoying time between naps