Here another opinion. I imagine
diogenesdenepa will be totaly confused
![Smile](https://cdn.cambridgeincolour.com/forums/images/smilies2/smile.png)
But he shall choose what he thinks is best for him.
Problem with UV filters is not necessarily degradation of colors. Main problem is flare when shooting with a strong lightsource in the frame (e.g. sun, on sunshine, sunset, etc.). I have Hoya & Heliopan UVs. Heliopan is better. But best is no filter at all. Much better!
Protection: I prefer to use the lenshood for this purpose. Dust in the lens - I have never heard of this problem at EF10-22 (might happen, I don't know, just never heard of it); anyhow a filter will not protect the lens so that dust does not get behind the front glass. Bad built lenses (e.g. EF 50 f/1,8) will get dust behind lens with or without protective filter.
Finally, as far as I am concerned, I screw an UV (slim) filter on only when shooting in bad conditions: bad weather, when I am in the boat (water splashes) and similar situations. Hoya (slim) UV would be good enogh for this purpose, I would not spend so much money on Heliopan UV a second time. I have never had B+W filters, could be that these ones generate less flare, but they are very expensive, higher priced than Heliopan.