Do you use protection!!

[magicrhodes]

I always use UV filters and have scratched one which led me to believe I had stopped the lense being scratched...

[Lifeboat1721]

Thanks for all your replies, and very interesting.. I thought it might stir up a few things

For me being registered dissabled and visually handicapped as I only have 1 eye and my left has no peripheral vision the doctors have written me off  So I came back to photography and bought the best kit that I could afford And with having damaged a lens many years ago ( It got a lot of salt spray on it as I was try to shoot Waves at Morecambe I thought protection this time ) ...

I can't afford f2.8 lens and because I cant drive I need things that I can carry easily so I use f3.5 apart from the 50mm f1.4.

And please guys don't start giving me offers of second hand kit or anything as I just wouldn't be able to handle it.

If you look at my flickr link you will see the type of things I like to shoot. http://www.flickr.com/photos/8749230@N08/

Ian

[Oldboy]

With regards to the seaside, then it would be wise to use a filter to protect from sea spray and sand, but as a general rule it's not needed. 

[SimonW]

Picsfor - One of my favourite three letter abreviations is TLA...

[anglefire]

Picsfor - One of my favourite three letter abreviations is TLA...

Ah, a better one is ETLA!

And back on topic, fitting a filter on my 17-40mm lens completes it weather sealing. Having said that, I spent a weekend in Barcellona a couple of years ago when it rained for most of it and just kept the camera (350D) and 17-40 lens covered/wiped dry occasionally and both still work as good as new!

[Sandy]

I always use a UV filter and lens hood, to safe guard my lenses

Sandy

[Jonathan]

I always use a UV filter and lens hood, to safe guard my lenses

I never use a UV filter to safe guard my quality

A decent filter costs about 10 - 20% of the cost of the lens. (As the lens gets more expensive your definition of "decent" will rise).  Insurance costs about 1 - 2% of the value of the kit.

[anglefire]

Not forgetting that the bigger lenses (Like say the Canon 300mm f2. have a built in protection in so far as the first element is replaceable if it gets damaged. I assume Nikon et al are similar!

[Forseti]

I never use a UV filter to safe guard my quality.

What would REALLY REALLY be useful is if one of the proponents who claim that having a UV filter fitted (a good quality filter of course) could post at least one side by side example of the same image (under the same conditions needless to say) illustrating where the quality has been lost as a result of having the filter fitted. I've never tried this for myself, and have always been a bit sceptical of this claim based of course upon the IQ of my own images which I agree is entirely objective. I have always used B+W filters and when I think back how many times these filters have been cleaned (and the sometimes dubious methods used) I'm glad that my front elements have never been subjected to this treatment.