Use polarizer and UV at the same time

[gk_sullivan]

<p>I take aerial photos of real estate and run into several situations where I use filters.</p>

<p>When there is glare a polarizer helps significantly</p>

<p>When it is hazy a UV filter helps</p>

<p>I've never used them together... wondering if there are any negatives to using both at the same time. There is usually enough light as I take them when there is bright sunlight or on slightly cloudy days. I shoot 1/500 or faster using a D40x, Nikkor 28-125 AF-S 3.5-5.6 D ED lens.</p>

[ArthurRichardson]

<p>GK,</p>

<p>Check for vignetting, that's the one thing that comes to mind.</p>

 

[luis_g]

<p> This is exactly the kind of thing photographers should test for themselves. Set up the tripod, frame a distant scene (similar to the altitude you work from). Put both filters on the camera, make a few exposures. Take the UV off, make some more esposures, compare results for yourself.</p>

<p> </p>

[conrad_hoffman]

<p>You definitely need to test. FWIW, I've never seen a UV filter do very much, even at high altitudes but YMMV. It's also possible that the polarizer isn't passing much UV anyway, but that data might be hard to find, so testing is the best plan. Be sure to test over the full range of focal lengths and at various apertures, looking for both vignetting and sharpness issues. That should be 16 frames minimum.</p>

<p>CH</p>

 

[dave_wilson1]

<p>FWIW, if you found any benefit from such a rig for your specific application, I would think putting the UV on the outside might be a better option. The two will rotate together, the two filters will have less air space between them, and I'm just thinking the order of events. Either cut down the UV/Haze prior to Polarizing it, vs. Polarizing the light first before what? It's at this point I would think the UV/Haze filter to be ineffective to some degree as the light has already been sent through the Polarizer. With UV/Haze first I would think you're eliminating the light wavelengths that you want to eliminate first prior to the Polaraizer. I also think a Haze filter, which is still in the yellow family but stronger than UV might be better for your app. This is where I think the older Cokin system has it's stregnths. You can leave the Haze on he outside as stationary and just rotate the Polarizer in a middle slot. Not sure if there is an answer to all this besides careful testing like already said, but the matters I brought up would be in my test.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Hoya makes a combined UV/Cir-PL: http://www.hoyafilter.com/products/hoya/gf-05.html</p>

[CvhKaar]

<p>Dieter, I didn't know that one, i've tried UV + Pola before, but it gave me bad images due to one flter reflecting back into the other one, no matter in which order used .<br>

So i'l have a look wether I can find that combined one Thx for that !</p>

[walterh]

<p>"It's also possible that the polarizer isn't passing much UV anyway, but that data might be hard to find,....."</p>

<p>Actually Conrad, B+W publishes the transmission curves for their filters:<br>

I cannot find the file I have downloaded some time ago but if you search here you may find what you need:<br>

http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/pdf/filter/<br>

Some pdf are in English. The transmission curves are international :-)</p>

<p>If you cannot find what you need call the distributor in your country. At least here in Germany B+W are very helpful and know their products well.<br>

A good pol filter is probably all you need, cutting UV well. However, if you want to stack filters you need the best filters you can get. Remember that slim filters usually lack the front thread and cannot be stacked by the thread. But your outermost filter can of course be a slim.</p>

[CoryAmmerman]

<p>I don't know if there's any benefit from using both together, but I was out the other day using a UV and a C.P. together for no other reason than being too lazy to take off the UV filter that normally resides on my lenses. I wasn't worried about vignetting because my C.P. is 58mm and my UV filter is 52mm and I was using an FX lens on a DX body. As far as flaring or ghosting, I can't use my lens hood with this setup, so I was already taking precautions against pointing towards the sun (not much of a problem since the C.P. works better facing away from the sun). The IQ didn't suffer noticeably as the pics were still sharp viewed at 100% (as sharp as usual anyway). I'll post a sample.</p><div></div>

[Two23]

<p>I've yet to notice that a UV fitler does anything at all to help an image, myself. My thinking is using it will dramatcally increase the number of shots hit by flare problems. Don't most all NIkons have a very effective UV shield over the sensor anyway? I shoot a few times a year from an airplane and have tried polarizers but without much luck. The plane is moving so quickly I've found it difficult to dial the polarizer and get off a shot.<br />Kent in SD</p>

[walterh]

<p>Kent good point but if you can direct the plane as may be the case here the situation will be different.</p>

 

[plasma181]

<p>I remember reading somewhere that most filters block U.V. anyway. If you know a chemistry student, or someone who works in a chemical plant or lab, he could check U.V. transmission of your filter for you. </p>

[gk_sullivan]

<p>Thanks, everyone for your responses. I'll do some testing and see what comes of it. The polarizer helps, I can usually just dial it in (watch for glare to decrease off of roadways and buildings) and leave it. It works best when shooting toward the ground with the sun in the background. I've not really proven to myself that the UV does much of a job cutting haze. I didn't know there was a separate haze filter -- will look into that!</p>

<p>Gael</p>