Travel Photography - Advice on use of Pol filter if not shooting RAW?

Advice, input, suggestions, etc. on this question, please.

I typically don't shoot RAW...no, you don't need to badger me about that, I'm trying to get better. But, I do typically use a Circular Polarizer filter on my dslr for outdoor shooting. friends have suggested I stop using the Pol filter and use only a UV filter to help with lighting. sorry if this is a really basic question for all of you active photographers...and there may not be a standard answer.

anyway, what do you do? what's your reaction to this advice? thank you.

Advice, input, suggestions, etc. on this question, please.

I typically don't shoot RAW...no, you don't need to badger me about that, I'm trying to get better. But, I do typically use a Circular Polarizer filter on my dslr for outdoor shooting. friends have suggested I stop using the Pol filter and use only a UV filter to help with lighting. sorry if this is a really basic question for all of you active photographers...and there may not be a standard answer.

anyway, what do you do? what's your reaction to this advice? thank you.

a polarizer isn't a filter one would routinely use. polarizers are good for creating more saturated skies or cutting glare on the surface of a pond or reflections on glass. if you aren't shooting scenes with either of those, then there is no need to use a polarizer.

as for a uv filter, some people use them to protect the front of the lens and other people feel that they detract from the image quality. uv filters do not do anything to help lighting since the sensor is not very sensitive to uv light.

regardless of which filters you do use, don't get cheap filters. there's nothing worse than spending a lot of money on lenses and cameras and then buying the cheapest filter you can find. try to get a multi-coated filter (e.g., hoya shmc or b+w mrc) if at all possible.

thank you. thats' helpful. I've always liked the more stark colors in the sky and on water with the Pol. just not sure how others use filters.

I meant to be clearer about the Pol/UV and light...I understand UV does virtually nothing aside from protect the lens...but that Pol filters reduce the amount of light to the sensor thus requiring setting adjustments. I should have been clearer about that.

I also understand about the filter quality...thanks for reinforcing that.

more input would be appreciated...thank you

I generally do all my outdoor shooting with a polarizer unless it's very early morning or late evening.

You might find this helpful

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/polarizers.shtml

I really like luminous landscape.

Decades ago, a lot of photographers left polarizers stuck on the ends of their lenses at all times in an effort to get more vivid colors out of the films that were available at the time. With today's technology, routine use of a polarizing filter is not necessary. I do, however, usually use one when shooting outdoors on a sunny day, as the polarizer makes it easier to expose my subjects properly without blowing out the sky; it helps me do a better job of recording the scene the way my eyes remember seeing it. Do note, though, that when photographing bodies of water, the polarizer's reflection-cutting properties may do more harm than good.

A UV filter isn't likely to help with lighting - your camera's sensor probably already has one built-in, anyway. The primary purpose of a UV filter is to absorb scratches, impacts, and other trauma that would otherwise befall the exposed front element of your lens, possibly necessitating an expensive repair or even replacement. And yes, multi-coated filters are wonderful and no one should settle for anything less.

..... Do note, though, that when photographing bodies of water, the polarizer's reflection-cutting properties may do more harm than good.



Could you expand on this?

Could you expand on this?

I think what Factotum is saying is that when shooting a body of water, we're used to seeing it reflecting the sky. With a polarizer, you might be looking down into the water and it could be dark and murky looking.

BTW- remember that polarizers don't do much on a foggy day. You might as well take the filter off and gain a couple stops of exposure.

I think what Factotum is saying is that when shooting a body of water, we're used to seeing it reflecting the sky. With a polarizer, you might be looking down into the water and it could be dark and murky looking.

Correct! Without the reflection, you may find your water looks quite dull. I know I've had that happen.

I agree, a foggy day is not a good time to go out with the polarizer on. It won't do much for you in overcast weather either, so at those times you may as well remove the polarizer and let the extra light reach your lens. Ditto for just about anywhere indoors - unless you are looking to cut the reflection from a glass window or something like that.

thank you, all, very helpful posts.

I think what Factotum is saying is that when shooting a body of water, we're used to seeing it reflecting the sky. With a polarizer, you might be looking down into the water and it could be dark and murky looking.

BTW- remember that polarizers don't do much on a foggy day. You might as well take the filter off and gain a couple stops of exposure.

Correct! Without the reflection, you may find your water looks quite dull. I know I've had that happen.

.

I missed the key part "bodies of ....". I have used a polarizer to shoot salmon in a stream and the result was very impressive. Of course, I was using the filter to cut down on surface glare, which it did very well.