Wrenched this off a Nikon 18-35mm this morning.

Hmm. Still not convinced.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008/10 ... -scratches

...is putting it mildly.
I quite agree with the comments Sammy made underneath the article - and as for removing a dinged filter? A good pair of pliers, some patience and there's no real reason you should cause more damage to the lens ring if you're careful.

YMMV, but I'm glad the filter took whatever impact caused it to shatter than the front element.

The argument goes that manufacturers make the front element the easiest one to replace, and anything which breaks a filter might well damage the front element as well.

The other argument is filters that are guaranteed to not alter the optics of the lens, or cause reflections and other issues, are very expensive - sometimes prohibitively so.

Finally, using a lens with the hood attached offers a good measure of knock protection, at least against anything not coming straight at you!

As you say, YMMV. My personal view is they're not worth the expense (I do still have one on my 10-20 wide angle, and that cost nearly a ton! It still causes reflections where you can see the lens ring in the frame under some conditions). Then I try to be pretty careful with my kit, and always use a lens with the hood in place.

Several points:

1. Ouchies - hope that's the only damage
2. I shall be being more careful with my equipment - even though it's only cheap.
3. I'm not sure that a filter would stop anything that break a front element anyway
4. Large image is LARGE!

All fine arguments, but I still come down on the side of using one means the cheaper item - the filter - only has to be replaced should anything catastrophic happen.
I unscrewed the filter, we'll get another one eventually, and the lens is good to go in moments.
I wouldn't be happy shooting with a cracked front element - so sending it out for servicing means it's out of the loop for at least a week, and a new front element will be considerably more than a filter.
Of course, a hood is something we should use too.

It's a bit like lens caps. I've been brought up around movie camera lenses more than camera lenses. Where the trainee might not ever be trusted on a job to handle the lens, let alone take caps off.
I would never dream of not using lens caps, but my colleagues advice to the students is to throw them away.
This is unbearable for me. I can't fathom the logic at all. Seriously, it makes me itch to hear him say it.
*shudders*

For me, I'll risk cleaning marks on the filter. It's ultimately there to take the abuse of day to day life so the front element doesn't have to, and thereby extends the practical life of the lens, AFAIC.
I'd rather spend five minutes carefully taking a shattered filter off than be packing a lens up and waiting for invoices for a lens service and element replacement.

All good points, to be fair.

It's a choice. I've made mine based on my own experiences and stuff.

All this reminds me I need to get a lens serviced.

Mark