I live on a farm. Yes I love my filters. I use B&W and now even tiffen (I used to hate tiffen back in the day).

I can understand what your saying about a scratched lens being almost impossible to detect, so if that is the case surely no one would detect the difference a quality filter could make too an image.

@@lukes5533 I think those scratch and dirt studies didn’t get to the extreme pixel-peeping level with inspection of subtle effects that would only show up in huge prints. Matt looks at tiny chromatic aberrations and lens flare from direct sunlight and other really picky details. Also there could be problems from side lighting and other odd situations. It’s worth investigating for people paying big money for the absolute best performance. On the other hand, if your photos are for web use or standard size prints, or your style is more about art than absolute technical performance, then it’s amazing what you can get away with.

​@@lukes5533 where filters tend to cause problems is less about scratched and dirt and more about the issue of having parallel surfaces. Light passes through that first surface and can get trapped between parallel surfaces like the "infinity mirror" illusions that were a popular decoration in the 70's. This ends up reducing the overall light transmission to the lens, and it can cause flare condition that reduces overall contrast in a way that a scratch or a few dust specs would never show up. Close inspection and careful cleaning can't remove this issue any more than wiping your eyes will make your vision better if you have cataracts. Filter choice matters, and I insist on multicoated filters unless I have a specific reason. That coating helps improve light transmittance and reduces the issues of internal reflection. The best filters have coating systems that can exceed the effect of coatings on even high end lenses. So for all practical purposes they become invisible.

They're not available stateside for some reason. Maybe we have to bug Nikon to get the Arcrest here

The NC is an older generation filter compared to the Arcrest and have a newer coating. They don't yet offer the Arcrest stateside and it's been a few years. Maybe if we bug Nikon they might bring them here

Interesting, I have the same question as I use Nikon NC filters on my lenses.

Good on you. I did the same once, tried the 'no filter' approach. Ended up with a nice, visible scratch on the front lens. Perhaps 3mm long, outside the image circle likely, and I see no ill effects, but the lens value certainly went down a lot. First two weeks into having the lens. Didn't even realize when/where/how it happened. Yes, I'm rough with my gear. And yes, that was one reason why I still do filters today. The other is ease of cleaning when the cam is out'n about for extended periods of time (mine always is, kind of. If I bring it, it's out, ready).

@@marcusbraun8889 Isn't cleaning the filter the same as cleaning the lens, it's on the front and what ever is on the front needs cleaning

@@stevehayward1854 - sure, but you wanna be careful cleaning that front lens. Don't want any scratches there, don't want to damage the coatings. Quick clean a filter? T-shirt, napkin, whatever....

They are a newer generation product with improved coatings but aren't available stateside yet. The coating is supposed to be more repelling like B+W Nano coating

@@Bunnyisms I found more info after I posted. DPReview had an article on them in 2017. The fact they still aren't available here must mean they aren't big sellers. Considering they are double the cost of Nikon NC filters that's not surprising.

It's been a few years and the Arcrest are not available stateside yet. They have different and more advanced coatings than the standard NC

@@Bunnyisms Thanks for this information!

How come they don’t protect much? That doesn’t sound very logical. If I put a barrier in front of the lens, surely it will protect what’s behind it?

@@Ahduciekwndnbbbsvvvghhhyyyyy I recommend watching Steve Perry's KZfaq video 'UV Filters - Do You Need Them Or Not?'. He does several experiments to see what the effect is of having a filter on a lens and I agree with his conclusions at the end. The fact is that by the time you buy a high quality 'protective' filter for 4 or 5 lenses, you have probably spent what it would cost to repair a lens that did become damaged, and since in the most optimistic case a filter will only protect from some very specific impact scenarios that are probably not even the most common, I don't think it's worth it. Instead I would suggest buying one 'protective' filter for each filter size you use and put it on only when it makes the most sense, like with blowing sand. I know in my experience (40+ years) I have never had something impact my front lens itself but I have dropped a lens once and of course there is no way a filter will help in that case. And for those worried about minor scratches to their front lens, I would say that modern high quality lens materials and coatings are VERY good, and it takes a lot to scratch one. And last, I have noticed image degradation in some instances, even with high quality filters (yes, I'm a pixel peeper). All my opinion of course, every photographer should do what they want and what they are comfortable with.

@@pjcornelius Well said!

Plain glass (like the ARCREST ones Matt just described) makes more sense than UV. Digitals cameras already have a filter over the sensor against UV and IR.

I’ve also used a UV or skylight filter on my lenses. Maybe next time I buy another lens I’ll try this new Nikon filter.

I don’t know. I will try and find out 😀

True, I've got a 16-35 f4 with broken off filter thread for that reason. However, I like filters as you can give'm a quick wipe to clean, no worries about coatings, front lens. Plus lens hoods are so darn big. They make your lens a lot bigger when in the bag.

They sell grips to remove really stuck filters if needed. Magnetic filters are terrific to avoid this issue too.

I second that motion. Sometimes I wonder why manufacturers can't think of alternatives instead of glass? a thin clear acrylic or high resolution see through plastic perhaps? currently many lens hood are very flimsy, light and easy to come off is nudged wrongly?

@@PharaohMan007 That's a solution to a problem I don't have. I don't put $300 filters on $3000 lenses - no matter who makes them or how many times they promise that sharpness isn't affected or that with these really special gloves or grips you can get them off - I promise. Geesh. Skip the filter. Skip the headache.

@@DamonMoritz cool! Sorry for the advice then.

Had that happening, too, lens cap coming off inside, but always used filters so was never an issue. I jumped once of a small concrete wall, not enough 'forward clearance'. My shoulder bag dove on top of the concrete wall, with smashing results. Since then my lenses go lens cap down into bags/belt pouches. I think I didn't have lens caps coming off anymore since then either.

@@marcusbraun8889 Shame we have to go through these issues before making change.

@@isotechimages.9130 - well, I guess we have to find out what works for us. At the end of the day to me those are tools, and my focus is on using them, not preserving them. Of course I have to accept the possibility of damage/total loss with such an approach. I'm ok with that. Long time ago I was in Malaysia, on the way to Singapore, where I would get an F4, my first AF cam. I already had an AF 80-200 2.8 (a while later a total loss in the Philippine, involved a concrete pier 🥴) and met a fellow who had a D90. Eager to try AF of my 80-200 I offered it to him to put on the D90. He wouldn't do it as he wasn't sure if it was compatible or would be damaging his body...😂

Great advice. No de- noise. Just low iso and capture one. 👍😀

@@MattIrwinPhotography Awesome low-light shots you produce!

@@PharaohMan007 Are there any photos in this? do you mean video? shutter at 1/50 w 1.2-F2 is a ton of light

@@northofbrandon Hi, photos in what?

I shoot a lot in bad weather. Fine rain or sea spray. I tried just the 85 mm 1.2 hood on its own. Unfortunately pollutants made it to the front element. So thus I looked for a solution. This video is what I found.

@@MattIrwinPhotography yeah I suppose if you’re in conditions like that fair enough. I’m not using $3000 lenses. My most expensive is around $900.

Must be I like shooting in rain and sea spray. So I see real impacts on front elements. As I’m interested in extreme atmospheric conditions in my images. What do you mostly shoot Craig ?

@@MattIrwinPhotography I'm wildlife and macro-centric with the occasional event, portrait session or wedding, though I've been rather sedentary with photography lately because of a poor work-life balance. In your case it makes sense for sure! I am in the central US, near Chicago, so no salt here, but plenty of snow and ice. I had a gust of wind knock over a softbox once and it plowed right into my camera and tripod, which went straight into the concrete but somehow I lucked out and the only damage was to the lens hood which shattered, the sturdy D700 was not harmed, nor the 85mm 😯 I thought for sure the front element would be chipped or shattered. Keep up the great work and vids, all the best!

Wise man.

Jeff testing will come, this video was to share something I never knew existed. Testing takes time, and real world use might be 6 months. More will come. :)

When I use a uv (rare), this is the brand

@@csc-photo cool

They are excellent.

Sure. Not a standard window. I think the drop is so specific to each drop we can’t say. Sometimes it will assist, sometimes it won’t. And yes my main reason is for airborne pollutants. Sea spray, sand, industrial pollutants etc.

it was smudged. Clean the filter and go about your business.

@@gosman949 - not smudged, quite sharp. Just the image being mirrored by light bouncing inside lens. Too much glass.

Lol I call bull crap

@@lukes5533 yepper. I think so too.

Hi Nelson, I wrote this in another comment, I will copy it here. Hi K J, this is a first look video. (and I will add that to the title - it's a good idea) I have used filters, as I said in the video my entire career. Almost 35 years. Personally I have never seen any ill effect of a filter (I have always spent good money). So in my personal experience over those years, and probably something like 100 lenses, they offer more good than bad for my use case. That is my experience, so this is the place where this video comes from. Lets note a few things. I suspect I put my lenses in more extreme settings than the majority of photographers. I like to shoot in heavy rain, or seas spray, or anywhere atmospheric conditions are interesting and or extreme. Of course some photographers don't dream of putting their gear in harms way. I am happiest when things are most extreme. For example, photographers who are studio bound, yes filters may be a waste of time for them. I recently listened to all those who said don't use filters. Against my years of experience. And used the very expensive 85mm 1.2 in harsh conditions, rain and sea spray. I found even with the lens hood on, atmospheric pollutants made a home on the front element. The front element was now partially coated with fine sand particles and sea spray had cemented themselves to the front. I was disappointed I had listened to others, on reflection, who probably don't expose their gear in as harsh conditions. Who don't engage in my use case. I was disappointed. So I looked for a solution. This is what I found. Now of course we all make conclusions in life based on our experience, practices and use case. My 30 year history with owning and punishing Nikon equipment, my own experiences with how I expose my front elements to danger, this experience comes to bare, for me, and for this video. In 6 months I'll come back to you with some real world mileage. This is me sharing my story, of finding a product I did not know existed, and hoping it will be the best in the market. Coming out of the same design house as the lenses themselves seems like a good start. Perhaps it is something others might like to explore themselves, as i said in the video, they may not know they even exist. This is a community, and I look forward to the community building a picture together.

To me it's more about cleaning. Filter or front lens picks up dirt, finger prints, spray, rain, whatever, so needs to be cleaned. Frequently if the lens is out'n about all times. I quickly clean the filter with whatever is available and go on shooting. I'm not worried about damaging front lenses/coatings that way, after all the filter is expendable. Not so a front lens. And getting out blowers, lens cleaning fluid, microfiber cloth and what not five times or more per day is just not really convenient - or even applicable, depending on the shooting conditions. It's not about preventing damage really because of drops, scraping or whatever, it's about the 'quick and easy cleaning' and continuing to shoot at all times instead of stopping and doing 'proper cleaning'.

@@marcusbraun8889 Yep that would be another plus for using them.