rawphotos Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 <p>I have a UV filter on my lens most of the time. If I am doing landscapes and want to place a circular polarizer on the lens is it correct to take off the UV filter or leave it on? Thanks Jim</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 <p>You take the UV filter off.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henryp Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 <p>Each filter has two air-to-glass surfaces and each surface is a breeding ground for flare. Flare can degrade an image thoroughly and it really cannot be repaired with Photoshop or the like. The fewer the filters the better.</p> <p>Henry Posner<br /> <strong>B&H Photo-Video</strong></p> Henry Posner B&H Photo-Video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rawphotos Posted July 21, 2009 Author Share Posted July 21, 2009 <p>Thanks for the help. What a great site for people to find answers to thousands of photo questions. Jim</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael R Freeman Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 <p>If you care, you'll remove the UV. If you're lazy, you won't. {wink}</p> <p>Seriously, there is no benefit to leaving the UV filter on when also using a polarizer. But with stacked filters what you do get is lots of potential for problems like:</p> <ol> <li><a href="http://toothwalker.org/optics/vignetting.html#mechanical">hard corner vignetting</a> ... </li> <li><a href="http://toothwalker.org/optics/flare.html">ghosts, and ...</a> </li> <li><a href="http://toothwalker.org/optics/flare.html">veiling lens flare. </a> </li> </ol> <p>If you want to see a good (i.e. bad) example of veiling lens flare, see the attached photos under the first post in this discussion: <a href="../nature-photography-forum/00Twao">http://www.photo.net/nature-photography-forum/00Twao</a></p> <p>As Henry Posner noted, no amount of PS work will rescue such an image.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam_earley1 Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 <p>I have a clear glass (UV?) filter on my camera, should I just leave that on for most shots? I dont have a polorizer.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 <p>Whether you need a UV or skylight filter depends on circumstances. Some folks never use 'em, some always use 'em. These debates tend to draw almost religious fervor.</p> <p>Being a heathen, I vary. I use 'em to protect the lens from damage where appropriate: photographing fires, sporting events up close (especially boxing - lotta blood and sweat flying), closeups of babies and puppies who just love to mash their noses against the lens, or when the wind is blowing grit and debris everywhere. Saved my expensive PC-Nikkor once when a dust devil blew up and showered me with pea sized gravel. Otherwise I take 'em off. I tend to leave UV filters permanently on a couple of favorite P&S cameras, but don't routinely use 'em on my SLR and dSLR lenses unless there's a risk of damage to the glass.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdjc Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 <p>I would rather accidentally damage a UV lens then damage my very expensive camera lens, but you do lose something whenever you add filter to your camera lens. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now