Samsung · Waterproof Camera & Lens Protection
Haida Greystone Multicoated UV Filter
Insufficient transparency on coating composition and PFAS risk.
Samsung's UV filter coating is not publicly specified. Multicoat optical coatings sometimes use fluorinated compounds, but Samsung discloses nothing about PFAS content or avoidance.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
Optical glass with multicoated UV filter
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
Why this grade
Unknown / proprietary coating
Proprietary coating with no disclosed chemistry.
Category baseline
other is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.
Vague safety claims only
Uses vague language ("eco-friendly", "clean") without a specific PFAS statement.
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
This is optical-grade glass with a multilayer anti-reflective and UV-blocking coating applied to the surface. The base glass itself (silica-based) is inert and safe; the risk sits entirely in the coating layers, which Samsung does not publicly specify. Typical multicoatings for UV filters use metal oxides (titanium dioxide, silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide) or proprietary polymers, but without ingredient disclosure, the exact composition and any fluorinated compounds remain unknown.
The brand's record and disclosure
Samsung has not published ingredient lists, material safety data sheets, or PFAS-avoidance commitments for this optical component. The company's broader camera and electronics divisions have faced environmental scrutiny but have not faced specific recalls tied to lens coatings. Absence of transparency on coating chemistry is the core concern; this is not a widely used consumer-facing product, so public testing and third-party certification data are minimal.
How it compares in its category
Optical filters and coatings are rarely subject to consumer safety testing, unlike cookware or textiles. Most UV filter manufacturers (Canon, Nikon, Zeiss, Hoya) similarly withhold detailed coating formulations as proprietary. This product is neither ahead of nor behind industry norms for transparency; the entire category operates with minimal public disclosure. For photography enthusiasts, reputation-based brand choice is the main differentiator rather than published safety data.
If you buy it
Handle the filter by the barrel or frame edge, never touch the coated surfaces, as skin oils and dust degrade the coating and reduce UV blocking efficiency over time. Store in a dry, cool place away from direct sunlight and extreme temperature swings, as thermal stress can cause coating delamination. Clean only with lens-grade microfiber cloths and appropriate optical cleaning solution; harsh solvents may interact with the coating binder. Replace if you notice visible scratches, clouding, or reflective discoloration, as the protective layers have failed.
Beyond PFAS: other things we checked
Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”
Coating delamination and wear
Multilayer optical coatings can separate or flake at edges or with repeated cleaning, potentially generating microscopic particles. No specific failure data exists for this Samsung model, but optical glass coatings are known to degrade after 5-10 years of use depending on storage and handling.
Heavy metals in coating pigments or binders
Metal oxide multicoatings may incorporate trace metals (titanium, aluminum, or rare earths) or metal-based adhesion promoters. Since composition is undisclosed, the presence and bioavailability of any heavy metals cannot be ruled out; however, the coating is sealed and not in contact with food or skin during normal use.
Fluorine-containing polymers in coating binder (PFAS risk)
Some premium optical coatings use Teflon-family coating binders to improve water and oil repellence. Samsung's silence on coating ingredients leaves this unresolved; industry use of Teflon-type coating-based primers on high-end filters is documented but not confirmed for this model.
Off-gassing or volatile organic compound release
Optical glass and cured coating systems do not typically release volatile organics after manufacturing. No reports of odor, fume, or respiratory symptoms from UV filter use exist in public records.
Biofilm or fungal growth on lens surface
Humid storage or condensation can allow algae or mold to colonize the coating surface, particularly if the filter is left damp. This is a cleanliness issue rather than a chemical toxicity hazard, but compromises function and may require aggressive cleaning.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 35% confidence. It is not a lab result.
No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.
The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.
Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.
Safer alternatives in Waterproof Camera & Lens Protection
B+W
67mm UV Haze Filter
Glass optic with multi-coated lens surfaces
Lower concern. Optical glass and standard coatings unlikely to contain PFAS.
⚠Brand says nothing about PFAS
B+W
UV Haze 010 Filter
Optical glass lens with multi-coated optical surfaces
Lower concern. Optical glass filters rarely use PFAS.
⚠Brand says nothing about PFAS
B+W
Basic Clear Filter MRC
Optical glass, multi-coated
Lower PFAS concern. Optical glass filters rarely use PFAS-based coatings.
⚠Brand says nothing about PFAS
More waterproof camera & lens protection grades
How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.