<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Protect Your SLR Photo Lens with a UV Filter</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.visualphotoguide.com/protect-your-slr-photo-lens-with-a-uv-filter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.visualphotoguide.com/protect-your-slr-photo-lens-with-a-uv-filter/</link>
	<description>Photography for the rest of us.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2008 05:33:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Markus</title>
		<link>http://www.visualphotoguide.com/protect-your-slr-photo-lens-with-a-uv-filter/#comment-504</link>
		<dc:creator>Markus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 02:05:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.visualphotoguide.com/protect-your-slr-photo-lens-with-a-uv-filter/#comment-504</guid>
		<description>Thanks for your advice, Ken. I might have to test some shots with and without the filter to see how much of a difference it makes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your advice, Ken. I might have to test some shots with and without the filter to see how much of a difference it makes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Elliott</title>
		<link>http://www.visualphotoguide.com/protect-your-slr-photo-lens-with-a-uv-filter/#comment-503</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Elliott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 01:21:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.visualphotoguide.com/protect-your-slr-photo-lens-with-a-uv-filter/#comment-503</guid>
		<description>I used to believe that a UV filter was a must-have accessory.  But I discovered that they seriously degrade image quality on digital cameras.  The sensor is covered with a highly reflective piece of flat glass.  Light hits it and bounces back to the filter.  Since the filter is flat, it reflects back.  The lower quality the filter, the worse the effect.  Good B+W filters get real expensive in the larger sizes.  I paid nearly $100 each for my filters.  But my tests clearly show that my image quality is lower with a UV filter.  I've started leaveing them off my lenses.  I've got Nikon pro glass, so I'm quite motivated to protect it.  But when you put a $20 filter on a $1800 lens, you end up with a $20 lens.  Your photos above show this same effect.  Dump the UV lens for digital.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to believe that a UV filter was a must-have accessory.  But I discovered that they seriously degrade image quality on digital cameras.  The sensor is covered with a highly reflective piece of flat glass.  Light hits it and bounces back to the filter.  Since the filter is flat, it reflects back.  The lower quality the filter, the worse the effect.  Good B+W filters get real expensive in the larger sizes.  I paid nearly $100 each for my filters.  But my tests clearly show that my image quality is lower with a UV filter.  I&#8217;ve started leaveing them off my lenses.  I&#8217;ve got Nikon pro glass, so I&#8217;m quite motivated to protect it.  But when you put a $20 filter on a $1800 lens, you end up with a $20 lens.  Your photos above show this same effect.  Dump the UV lens for digital.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
