A hood primarily prevents flare from out-of-shot light hitting the lens. Only as a side effect it provides some mechanical protection of the lens, but the glass remains exposed.

The filters listed don't really serve their original functions of adjusting the colour or blocking UV, but do serve as a physical block protecting the lens glass front.

The question is, do you think you really need protection which is met by either or even both cases.

A hood could in theory improve image quality in some cases, and at worst does nothing (as long as it isn't too small!). The filter at best does nothing to the image, and at worse can increase flare, glare, alter colour or even add distortion.

Other practical considerations may apply, like physical size of a hood...

I had a Hoya HMC UV(O) filter on my Panasonic 20mm for a long time. I've stopped using it as I found I needed to remove it all the time for night shooting. That is a relatively good filter too, so don't expect finding something that much better. If the lens breaks, the lens breaks, I'll just have to be more careful. Only dropped the E-P1 one ever.

It depends where you use your camera in my opinion, for exclusive studio work I would probably not use a filter as it is a controlled environment , however i carry the camera and lenses EVERYWHERE so spending a few dollars on a filter for protection of the lens seems economic sense.

Then my Olympus 14-42 kit lens' filter (PRF-D40.5), - which I had a hell of a lot of trouble to find hereabout, - and costed US$50, - is 'no good'?  Doesn't stand to reason, doe's it?

Then my Olympus 14-42 kit lens' filter (PRF-D40.5), - which I had a hell of a lot of trouble to find hereabout, - and costed US$50, - is 'no good'?  Doesn't stand to reason, doe's it?

There are levels of good.  But with filters you get what you pay for. It is not uncommon to pay several hundred dollars for a good filter but a uv is on the lower end of the cost charts.  In the case of the kit lens I would  not bother with a protection filter as there is a point of diminishing returns.  To protect the lens, use a lens cap till you are ready to shoot or invest in a lens hood for a little more protection. 

Good/no-good and optics very rarely have any impact on reason and cost. It is what it is..... Each and EVERY layer of glass you place in the optic path impacts the image in a negative fashion so if you want the best quality you invest in the best glass (German schott glass, multiple coatings and so on. Which adds up quickly).  Like I said earlier, uv filters from the best makers are on the low end of the cost scale. 

You also do not want a $150 filter on a $100 lens!

I put NO FILTERS on my lenses unless they are needed for artistic intent (like an IR or polarizer).  I have lenses that range from $200 to $10,000 and would not ever consider a protection filter. To me a lens is a tool and I want it to generate the best images possible!

LOL "to filter or not to filter" probably ranks alongside "Nikon vs Canon" and "PC vs Mac" discussions on t'net Just know the strengths and weaknesses and use them appropriately and everything will be fine.

given that my primary lens is the 20mm panasonic could anyone recommend a lens hood?

TIA

Adri

Here's an interesting read 
--> http://desmond-downs.blogspot.com/2010/04/cheap-filters-and-bokeh.html

And I just tested what he said about the filter eating away 1/3 of a stop in exposure. It's not true. To me this is just like the post that talks about front teleconverters, things have changed quite a bit and companies like hoya and BW use quality multicoated glass that do less than 1% of anything to an image.
I mean, don't use them if u don't want to, its understandable even, but if you do want to, a good quality filter won't do any harm.
P.S. and that moon shot comparison is ridiculous, what was he using for a filter??

it's less than 1%.

...and definitely less than the haze from repeatedly cleaning the front lens element (preferably with your shirt)

I'm with you on the Hoya UV - never noticed any weirdness.; nor from Cokin.

Quote from: lisandra on November 10, 2010, 08:41:25 AM

it's less than 1%.

...and definitely less than the haze from repeatedly cleaning the front lens element (preferably with your shirt)

I'm with you on the Hoya UV - never noticed any weirdness.; nor from Cokin.

It gives me peace of mind too. I can go to the beach, shoot all I want, go home, and dip the filter in water and that's it. Without thinking about how am I gonna remove the salt from the lens without damaging it.