In article <4jiqou$hm9@duey.gte.net>, anchored@gte.net says...
Bob Neuman says...

>>If so, I would definitely prefer a Hoya, which is cheap around
>>here, and Hoya's are uniformly excellent, in my experience (and
>>I use one on my 80-200mm f2.8 Nikkor...... ;-).
>>Hope This Helps

>Seriously now, has anyone ever actually seen a difference in pictures
>taken thru a Tiffen, Hoya, Canon,(et al) UV? I mean actually seen, and
>not just accepted what they've read?
>I own multiple brands of filters, and as far as the UV's and warming
>filters, damned if I can tell the difference.

Generally, what you infer is true: that there are no practical differences among reasonably good UV filters, but if you are
particular, this is what I have found:
- Some rims are too thick for many wide-angles (Tiffen, especially).
- One filter brand seems to acquire a haze spontaneously (Tiffen).
- One filter brand is slightly irregular optically, making some
of their filters unsuitable for use on high-quality fast teles
(Vivitar).
- Some UV filters are slightly different in color, making indescriminate mixing of filter brands unwise, if you care about
color matching among your lenses for slide work.
- Some brands offer, or do not offer, multicoating (which I do not
consider important, but you may).
- Some brands have plastic rims (ugh!) (Cokin).
Hope This Helps