Evening. A couple of shots taken in Canterbury today. I felt this subject worked better in Black and White. A sad thing I noted about the men honoured, was that the great majority died from disease, and only around 10, out of over 100, died in battle.

Evening. Having been a photographer for a very long time, I have always fitted UV filters to my lenses, as it was always considered somewhat necessary on film, and it also helped protect the front element. However, following a discussion with another photographer, it seems that UV filters are not required at all for digital, and so, my question is...

Do you still, either out of habit or otherwise, fit a protective filter or UV filter to your lenses, or are you happy to rely on the lens hood as enough of protection for the front element?
Also, if using a clear filter, is there any particular brand you are happy with?

Cheers

Truth there.

That it was full of viruses. If that was the case Defender etc would pick up on it, and Adobe would be dead in the water.

Yes. I wasn't accusing him of lying, I felt that the accusation that stemmed from the Gadget Show comments was a bit odd. As I say never had an issue so far.

Never had it corrupt anything here. Strange accusation.

Well done. As said, interesting set up.

Yep, did very well really, I deleted loads of shots that were in focus. As for the guns, No. I guess they are conditioned to it through the training. The guns werent loud.

Nice, arty shot that.
Nice part of the world too.

A series of shots taken earlier in the year. A fine display of horsemanship. The poor balloons had no chance... Again shot on the 150 -450. The first time I've really tried this kind of shooting in many years. I think the camera did well.