PFAS50/ 100Good
Overall46/ 100Poor
52mm CPL Polarizer Lens Filter for Smartphone Photography Anti Reflective HD Clip On Mobile Enhance Sky Water Scenes Tra

· Waterproof Camera & Lens Protection Cases

52mm CPL Polarizer Lens Filter for Smartphone Photography Anti Reflective HD Clip On Mobile Enhance Sky Water Scenes Tra

Good

Coating formula unknown. Optical filters seldom use PFAS.

Verdict · SkipOptical glass filters carry minimal chemical hazard; no known coating toxins reported. Brand transparency on composition is weak but product class risk is low.

This smartphone lens filter has an undisclosed anti-reflective coating. Most optical coatings skip PFAS, but the brand won't say either way.

The better-graded swap

Case Mate Waterproof Floating Pouch

Case-Mate

Case Mate Waterproof Floating Pouch

85/100 safety

85Excellent

Same rubric that flunked this product. The swap earned Excellent.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

Optical glass lens with anti-reflective coating (unspecified composition)

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Category baseline

The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.

90/ 100
♾️

Vague safety claims only

Uses vague language ("eco-friendly", "clean") without a specific PFAS statement.

85/ 100
♾️

Unknown / proprietary coating

A coating is recorded with no disclosed chemistry.

75/ 100
🫧

Coating degradation and microparticle release

Long-term abrasion or physical damage to the coating could theoretically release microscopic particles. This is a durability issue rather than a primary chemical safety concern but warrants careful handling. Replacement is cheap and easy if coating fails.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Anti-reflective coating leaching

No toxicological data on coating composition is available. Dielectric optical coatings are generally chemically stable and not known to leach under smartphone use conditions (room temperature, brief exposure to skin oils and moisture). Risk is theoretical only.

95/ 100
⛏️

Heavy metals

Optical glass historically sometimes contained lead for refractive properties, but modern optical filters rarely use lead-containing glass due to cost and regulation. No specific lead or cadmium risk has been reported for Samsung smartphone accessories. Glass composition is not disclosed, so this assessment is based on industry norms.

Source, FDA
95/ 100

Adhesive or mounting material toxicity

The clip-on mount likely uses standard plastic (polycarbonate or ABS) and non-toxic adhesives typical of smartphone accessories. No reports of skin irritation, off-gassing, or chemical release from Samsung filter mounts exist. Material is not disclosed but poses negligible risk for brief contact.

95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

This is a circular optical glass lens with an anti-reflective coating applied to reduce glare and enhance image contrast. The core material (optical glass) is inert and poses no leaching or off-gassing risk under normal use. The coating composition is not disclosed by Samsung; most CPL filters use multi-layer dielectric coatings (often magnesium fluoride or similar optical polymers), which are stable and not known to release hazardous substances during handling or exposure to light and heat.

The brand's record and disclosure

Samsung provides no material safety data sheet or coating composition details for this accessory. The company has faced scrutiny on electronics manufacturing transparency but maintains general product safety standards for optical accessories. No recalls or safety complaints specific to CPL filters from Samsung are on public record. Lack of proactive material disclosure is a transparency weakness rather than evidence of a hidden hazard.

How it compares in its category

Smartphone lens filters are among the lowest-risk optics accessories because they are passive optical devices with minimal chemical complexity. Most competitors (including generic brands and premium manufacturers like B+W or Hoya) do not disclose anti-reflective coating formulas either, making this product typical rather than distinctive. The main differentiator in this category is optical quality and durability, not chemical safety.

If you buy it

Handle the glass surface carefully to avoid scratches and coating damage, which could reduce optical performance. Store it in a dust-free case or pouch; do not expose to extreme heat or direct flame, as the glass substrate is stable but adhesive bonding of coatings may degrade above 60-70°C. Clean gently with lens-specific cloths and solutions; avoid abrasive materials. No special disposal precautions are required; treat as standard glass waste at end of life.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 35% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

Better-graded alternatives in Waterproof Camera & Lens Protection Cases

Think Tank Digital Holster 5 V3

Think Tank Photo

Think Tank Digital Holster 5 V3

Ballistic nylon, weather-sealed fabric, metal hardware

PFAS Grade85Excellent
Overall Grade59Good
🏷️

Undisclosed water-repellent coating chemistry

Limited concern

70

Coating degradation over time

Limited concern

70

Camera holster with weather treatment; PFAS status undisclosed.

Brand says nothing about PFAS

Nikon WP-CP3 Marine Case for Camera

Nikon

WP-CP3 Marine Case for Camera

Polycarbonate/rubber with waterproof seals

PFAS Grade85Excellent
Overall Grade73Good

Polycarbonate degradation over time

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Rubber gasket hardening and seal failure

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Microbial growth in sealed moisture pockets

Limited concern

70

No coating described, and no PFAS statement from the brand.

Brand says nothing about PFAS

Nikon WP-N1 Waterproof Housing

Nikon

WP-N1 Waterproof Housing

Polycarbonate housing with waterproof seals

PFAS Grade85Excellent
Overall Grade77Excellent

Gasket material degradation

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Polycarbonate microcracking or crazing

Limited concern

70

No coating described, and no PFAS statement from the brand.

Brand says nothing about PFAS

More waterproof camera & lens protection cases 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.