Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Photography
Reload this Page >

Advice on use of Pol filter if not shooting RAW?

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Advice on use of Pol filter if not shooting RAW?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 5, 2009, 4:00 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SNA/LAX... somewhere sunny and warm, but crowded.
Programs: AA/UA/UR/MRP/IHG Plat
Posts: 916
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.
jacknyoc is offline  
Old Jun 5, 2009, 4:57 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 960
Originally Posted by jacknyoc
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.
pdxer is offline  
Old Jun 5, 2009, 6:46 pm
  #3  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SNA/LAX... somewhere sunny and warm, but crowded.
Programs: AA/UA/UR/MRP/IHG Plat
Posts: 916
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
jacknyoc is offline  
Old Jun 5, 2009, 7:36 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: CLE
Programs: UA Gold, HH Diamond, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,661
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/tu...larizers.shtml

I really like luminous landscape.
manneca is offline  
Old Jun 5, 2009, 9:20 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 592
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.
Factotum is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2009, 12:22 am
  #6  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Seattle
Programs: AA PLT 2MM+; Marriott PLT
Posts: 16,376
Originally Posted by Factotum
..... 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?
SeAAttle is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2009, 7:30 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New York, NY
Programs: Mileage Plus, Skymiles, EleVAte founding member, SPG
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by SeAAttle
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.
wiredboy10003 is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2009, 4:16 pm
  #8  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by wiredboy10003
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.
Factotum is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2009, 6:21 pm
  #9  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SNA/LAX... somewhere sunny and warm, but crowded.
Programs: AA/UA/UR/MRP/IHG Plat
Posts: 916
thank you, all, very helpful posts.
jacknyoc is offline  
Old Jun 7, 2009, 7:47 pm
  #10  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Seattle
Programs: AA PLT 2MM+; Marriott PLT
Posts: 16,376
Originally Posted by wiredboy10003
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.
Originally Posted by Factotum
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.
SeAAttle is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.