So I just went to my local camera store (National Camera). I meant to spend $20-$30 tops on a filter to protect my XL2 Lens. The guy there showed me all the options, but STRONGLY suggested I spend $89.99 on the B&W high performance filter. He basically said "why get a $4000 camera with an incredible lens and then put a crappy piece of glass in front of it?" He basically made me feel like I was a stooge if I didn't get the top-of-the-line filter and I could see his point. My question is, would I have noticed a difference?

That's the market price for the filter, I've got on I keep on my 16x Manual. Will YOU notice the difference? Hard to say. But it IS quality glass with an excellent coating.

I prefer to use the B+W range as they are superbly built and use top-grade glass. The F-Pro in the range are what I mainly use, although I also use the pro-grade line of Hoya and Tiffen filters.

Remember that filters have a flat surface and will add extra problems with flare so the ones with good glass and MC coatings are best when working in difficult light conditions. A good lens hood (the Canon 20X hood is a good one) or bellows/matt box/French flag, or even a hand shielding stray light, will help avoid reflections and maintain high contrast in your footage.

A UV filter is not always needed, but it is easier on the pocket to replace a new filter rather than a new front glass element.

The Polarizer filter is my most used filter and tends to remain on the lenses most of the time except for night shoots. The PL filter also acts as an extra ND filter in bright conditions, but its main use is to cut through reflections and haze, and tends to deepen colours and contrast in most situations.

The other types of filter that I use a lot, but mainly for landscapes, are the range of graduated coloured and neutral grad ND filters.

Some cheaper filters, such as the ones sold by the Jessops chain of photo stores are also of quite high quality but low price. Try to avoid the really low-priced filters by other compaines though as they can degrade performance in difficult light conditions. Stick to Hoya, Tiffen or B+W and you will not go far wrong.

For the resolution that the XL2 sees, it's hard to get a UV filter that degrades the performance of your camera noticably.

For the resolution that the XL2 sees, it's hard to get a UV filter that degrades the performance of your camera noticably.

You will when using a mediocre filter on the front when filming against the sunlight.

Filters hold their value well so see it as an investment and a practical means of insuring your front glass. That said, I do not use a UV filter on my Z1.

Its a good filter, and while you might not notice the difference, why chance it? Its only an extra $60. I did the same thing, went with the B&W filter. Might not be able to tell the difference but I also don't have to worry about it either. I think you made the right call.

Paul,

If you got ripped off so did I times 3 cuz I have one on both my 20xs and on the 3x lens. I used to sell the things so I know good from bad filters and chose the best there is.

Bill

You will when using a mediocre filter on the front when filming against the sunlight.

Now why would you want to do that? :)

Now why would you want to do that? :)

Against the light shots always add atmosphere to a shoot, especially when the sun is low on the horizon.

I remember paying a lot for a 4x4 Tiffen Clear White filter, which is, well... very invisible. Of course it stinks to pay a lot for something you don't see. But imagine what, I still don't see the Clear White, so it must be good, right? :-)

Like said before, filters don't loose their value that much. In the end, it's just one or two meals that make up for the cost.

Thanks guys. I feel better.