Do UV Filters used at night create artifacts?

Which of you are using UV filters?  I have a buddy who uses UV filters and personally I think they are a waste of money.  Will these used at night create artifacts?

The only reason to use a UV filter is in fair wind at
sea or in the desert, then it may protect the lens.

On Earth, the main source of UV light is our Sun
and at night…

Personally I just don't use them.  Honestly, never bought into that Koolaid.  However a buddy of mine thinks these are the cure for cancer and the best thing you could have on your camera.  

I was in the mood the rock the boat a little after a remark he made to me.  

UV filters could have found justification in the
old days of film but no longer with digital but
to protect the front lens.

I use them on every single lens.  I have had two lenses ruined that would have been fine if I had used a UV filter.  UV filters don't produce any artifacts at all.  They are plain, clear optical glass. 

I am in a minority by the way but I have learned the hard way how they can protect a front lens element.

fmw wrote: I use them on every single lens.  I have had two lenses ruined that would have been fine if I had used a UV filter.  UV filters don't produce any artifacts at all.  They are plain, clear optical glass. 

I am in a minority by the way but I have learned the hard way how they can protect a front lens element.

Not entirely true. They can produce flare from reflections when there is a strong light source. I don't use them and haven't for years. I do use lens hoods though to protect the front element. 

Nikon Shooter wrote: UV filters could have found justification in the
old days of film but no longer with digital but
to protect the front lens.

They had no use in filtering light in the film days either.  They are front element protectors and nothing else.  Actually a coated front element does a better job of filtering UV light than a UV filter. 

A lens hood can protect the lens from banging into something or most scratches but the UV filter can prevent damage from sand and dirt.

Nikon Shooter wrote: UV filters could have found justification in the
old days of film but no longer with digital but
to protect the front lens.

Shadowfixer1 wrote:

fmw wrote: I use them on every single lens.  I have had two lenses ruined that would have been fine if I had used a UV filter.  UV filters don't produce any artifacts at all.  They are plain, clear optical glass. 
 

I don't view flare as an artifact. It results from light bouncing around inside the lens and falling on the sensor from an angle, I view artifacts as digital.  I could be wrong about that.

After 1/2 century of photogaphy I can think of only 2 or 3 occasions where removing a protective filter reduced flare.  it is way way more common for a complex zoom lens to increase flare than a simple filter.  If you are worried about flare I would recommend abandoning zoom lenses rather than worrying about protective filters.  In other words, flare from a protective filter isn't much of a problem.

But you are in the majority.  Using a lens hood reduces flare much more than removing protective filters.  I'm a big fan of hoods as well.

They had a use once, a waste of money now, IMO.

I don't bother with UV filters. 6 years in, no problems so far.

Yeah, same here.  I just don't use a UV filter.  Save your $$ and pick up other filters like CPL or ND