Protective filter on Tamron 150-600

This question is not about the merits of protective UV/clear filters or not as I already put them on all my lenses, that is except for this one. My wife and I got one each and they are fantastic, however, given the size of the hood I decided I don't need more protection except maybe if I was near sea spray.

I just wondered how many of you have a filter on yours.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Nope mine is as naked as when I got it.

I have a B&W UV filter on mine.

I don't use UV filters. The Tamron suffers some CA already and an UV might make that worse in some cases.

For me the hood is all I need.

On a side note I heard all the cruiseliners were buying all the filters up and using them for porthole windows.

thank you thank you... be here all week. please tip your waitress

I don't use one, but I stopped using them on all my lenses a few years ago. Yep, filters for the Tamzooka should be about the right size for port hole windows. LOL.

I only use "protective" filters on lenses where I feel there's a danger of impact damage - a real possibility, given that I only shoot sports. For a 600mm lens, I don't believe there's any real chance of anything travelling far enough to hit my front element, so I skip using a filter.

I use protection all the time.

But I call it a hood.

One on mine,but then i did lose a lens to something sticky that got on it and damaged the coating,would never think of one for impact damage,cant see it would help in that case.

I have on mine because I spend a LOT of time on the beach in salt spray & sand. It's purely for the protection value

This is the problem with the Tamron at times:



You see the CA and although I can move most, it is not as easy. Using a UV filter can increase this horribly if you shoot at the right (wrong) angle. I bought one in the beginning for my 70-300mm convinced it would be good. After my first day of shooting it ended in the trashcan.

There might be a quality difference depending what brand of UV you buy and maybe I just had a bad one but all in all I don't see any benefits in using them. To protect from salt might be a good idea but where I live, salt comes in containers.

I have been using Telephoto lenses (Nikon since 2006) have never used filters ever for any reason. Never have scratched my lense and spend alot of time in the woods, mind you I always use a lense hood.

How about a polarizing filter? Does this person (Steve Perry) have it wrong about CPL's?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMOsBG2JaZY

A CPL comes at the expense of light. That's a high price to pay when birding especially since it too eats 1/1.5 stops of your AF capability.

I bought one but it's still on back order (B&W mulit coated uv), The hood on this lens really is a good protector, but going through thick brush like i do has always proved wise to have one. If i find image quality less i'll reconsider.