Filter for Sigma 50-500 "Bigma"

[McCruiskeen]

I wish to buy a Sigma 50-500 OS zoom lens and wonder about what other users of this lens consider to be the best bet for a filter. I always have a skylight or UV filter on all of my lenses to protect the front element and I am aware of the sensor reflection issue and "ghosting" with filters on the "Bigma." I would wish to use a 95 mm on the front of the lens, rather than one of those pop-in affairs (a) because of the protection issue and (b) because I suspect the other arrangement could cause focusing problems.

I am beginning to think of plumping for a Sigma Ex DG UV 95 mm filter, but wondered about a circular polarising filter, particularly if contrast is weak at wide apertures and long focal lengths.

What do people employ and with what results?

[Ukwildlifeo]

I have the sigma 150-500mm and I use the lens hood alone for protection. The buy a uv filter for protection is a way for a certain camera shops to make extra money. After all if your lens lands on the front it will hit a (relatively) solid piece of glass which I fancy standing up to cracking more than the flimsy plastic of a filter. This filter would shatter and create sharp edges which will then be postioned perfectly to scratch the front lens element!

Add in the fact at 85mm plus thread size filters are £80+ and the fact most degrade image quality, if only slightly, and I'll stick with the lens front element on its own!

Just my thoughts, I know some swear by them but I think they can make things worse

[freiston]

I'm with Ukwildlifeo on this one. I have the 150-500mm and do not use a 'protection' filter either (on any of my lenses - I find that the lens cap is a cheaper and tougher barrier-protection solution ). If I paid £80 quid for a filter, I'd be looking at protecting it too .

A polarising filter will cut a bit of light out and the Bigma is not a fast lens - so probably not a good idea as a 'permanently-on' solution.

[McCruiskeen]

Thanks Ukwildlifeo and freiston for your appreciated, thoughtful comments. You have clarified my thinking and saved me £89!

[wizzo]

I agree with all the above posts regarding filters. I have the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 and now never use a protective filter. In the first place, the filter would have to be of equal quality to the glass at the front and secondly, as pointed out in similar threads, the front element would have to be 'very' severely damaged/scratched to make any difference at all to the picture quality. Even quite sever scratching wouldn't show on the final image and apart from an increase in the possibility of flare, is not worth worrying about. I would save my money or invest in a decent polariser. I have actually 'bounced' my lens off the road, from head height, and the lens hood took all the impact. Even the lens hood on this thing is bullet proof, it's hardly marked! Wizzo