Has anyone compared UV to Clear Protection Filters

[PurdueRy]

So I keep hearing conflicting opinions. Some say UV doesn't matter for digital due to its low susceptibility to UV light. Some say it helps cut through haze. I would like to see proof either way. Has anyone seen pictures showing the same scene with and without UV filters on a digital camera?

 

[angry hampster]

I can tell you from years of experience that they don't matter any bit at all. If anything, they will make your photos more susceptible to flare.

 

[Sarachan]

What I have experienced from my shootings, is that it'll help, but pretty much only when you're photographing at a lake so, that half of the picture'll be water. (doing an XL-panorama from a nearby lake with thousands and thousands of shots, and selecting the best.)
Note: I live in Finland, so the UV-penetration is propably a bit different out here than there.
But, in the end - as angry hampster has said - in most cases, it's useless.

 

[Aharami]

so hampster, you dont use any kind of UV filter? I thought it doesnt really do anything besides just protect the front element of your lens. when i went to the beach, the UV filter took all the salt and moisture, and I'd rather wipe that down than my lens

 

[corkyg]

I'm with Aharami. I put UV or ND glass on all my L lenses mainly to protect the lens surface. Don't most good lenses have a anti-UV coating on the objective element?