Lens filters

[aerao1]

I acquired a circular polarizer for my 18-135 mm Canon EF lens having an UV filter. I would like to know where to fix the polarizer? whether to fix this over UV filter or inside the UV filter?

[oleleclos]

I'd fit it INSTEAD of the UV filter. Without getting into the debate for and against UV filters for lens protection (they are not needed for UV filtering as digital sensors do that themselves), I think most would agree: 1) that you don't neet TWO layers of protection and 2) that two filters compound the detrimental effect that any single filter inevitably has.

So when you need a polarizer, fit the polarizer, and when not, fit the UV filter - if you must

[Melkus]

I acquired a circular polarizer for my 18-135 mm Canon EF lens having an UV filter. I would like to know where to fix the polarizer? whether to fix this over UV filter or inside the UV filter?

How could you even use two at same time since they are threaded and must be screw on. But yes use one or the other.

[oleleclos]

How could you even use two at same time since they are threaded and must be screw on.

Many filters, especially UV, are double threaded so you can stack them or fit a lens hood. But don't stack unless absolutely necessary.

[Manfred M]

You want as few optical elements in front of your lens as possible; do not stack your filters unless there is a really good reason to. I'm a bit extreme here, but except in low light i have a polarizing filter for all of my lenses (other than the ultra-wide angle ones) on all the time, i.e. I have a polarizer for pretty well every lens that I own.

The only time I stack filters on a lens is when I am trying for a specific effect, where I will have, say a polarizer AND an neutral density filter at the same time. This doesn't happen too often.

[Andrew1]

Your filters should normally screw together in either order however some thin profile ones do not have the threads on the outside. Adding them would defeat the reason for the low profile in the first place. If you have such a polarizer don't put your UV on first. It goes in the bag until the CP comes off.

The UV on a digital camera is for protection only and all my lenses have them. I also have CP filters for each of the lenses and regularly stack both. Regularly because of the conditions I usually find myself in. Blowing sand/dirt/water is something I can encounter every time I go out and replacing my UV's are half the price of the CP's. Conditions at your own location will govern your preferred use.

The CP comes off when the effect is not important and/or I need the extra light. Both the filters are off on the very rare occasion when I'm indoors and on a tripod. You don't need to go overboard but you need good quality filters to help mitigate problems with interference. With the filters you can also have an increased chance of reflections depending on the angle of direct light(s) entering the lens. Vignetting caused by the outer ring(s) can also occur with some combinations.

[Melkus]

Double threaded, see you learn something new everyday<---------------Runs off to check his filters

[CP140]

I'd fit it INSTEAD of the UV filter. Without getting into the debate for and against UV filters for lens protection (they are not needed for UV filtering as digital sensors do that themselves), I think most would agree: 1) that you don't neet TWO layers of protection and 2) that two filters compound the detrimental effect that any single filter inevitably has.

So when you need a polarizer, fit the polarizer, and when not, fit the UV filter - if you must

I agree... one filter at a time unless there is some overwhelming reason to mount two... as an aside, here's a link to a rather tongue in cheek look at the effects of stacking filters..

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011...th-bad-filters

Regards

[aerao1]

Thanks a lot for all the feedback about the UV and CP filters. Now I decide to own a variable ND2- ND400 filter for my Canon EF-S 18-135 mm lens. The question is whether I can use CP and variable ND filter together?

[oleleclos]

Thanks for that link Martin. Tongue in cheek it may be but it's also making a point or two methinks.

[groovesection]

Thanks a lot for all the feedback about the UV and CP filters. Now I decide to own a variable ND2- ND400 filter for my Canon EF-S 18-135 mm lens. The question is whether I can use CP and variable ND filter together?

Surely stacking those 2 filters would be counter productive?
A CP will reduce glare/polarized light waves but an ND will reduce the amount of light.

I may be way off the mark though

[Manfred M]

Thanks a lot for all the feedback about the UV and CP filters. Now I decide to own a variable ND2- ND400 filter for my Canon EF-S 18-135 mm lens. The question is whether I can use CP and variable ND filter together?

Of course you can; I've certainly done this before when I needed this filter arrangement to get the shot. ND filter was mounted on the lens and the polarizer was screwed to the ND. That way it was easier to adjust the polarizer.

[Andrew1]

I also frequently use the CP to reduce the light. Manufacturers vary but I add 1.5 stops with mine.

[russellsnr]

Thanks a lot for all the feedback about the UV and CP filters. Now I decide to own a variable ND2- ND400 filter for my Canon EF-S 18-135 mm lens. The question is whether I can use CP and variable ND filter together?

Hi, Before you dive in with the variable filter you should have look at some of the feedback from those that have used it, many complain about the vignetting with these filters, I believe there is a FLICKR group on these filters.
Russ

[Donald]

My UV filters never come off. Hardly ever use the polarising filter nowadays, but when I did/do, it just goes onto the top of the UV, in the Cokin filter holder. A UV/CP/GND combination also worked fine. Nowadays, anything done with the GNDs or the Singh Ray Vari ND is done on top of the UV.

Don't think anyone has ever questioned the quality of the resulting images (apart from my lack of artistic ability of course).

I'm sure there are people who have seen and do see, the image quality issue as very real. I'm afraid I've just never seen it as an issue in anything I've done.

[Andrew1]

I have always been under the impression that in the UK a CP filter was a waste of money. For those in the UK, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

[CP140]

I have always been under the impression that in the UK a CP filter was a waste of money. For those in the UK, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

LOL... that's a bit of cheek considering Victoria gets pretty gloomy this time of year!

[Manfred M]

I shoot with polarizers when it is cloudy or raining out; they cut the glare on leaves regardless of the lighting.

[CP140]

Hadn't thought about the glare on leaves.... mind you, in this area it's mostly conifers.

Where I have used polarizers is in museums on vacation.... will usually get rid of some of the glare from the glass in the display case.... unless the glass has some funky metallic coating of course.

[Glenn NK]

LOL... that's a bit of cheek considering Victoria gets pretty gloomy this time of year!

Ummm, not nearly as much rain and gloom as Greater Vancouver - check the weather stats.

We get about 1/2 the rain that GV gets. Had a few showers today - how's it in Van? I have a client in Port Coquitlam - I enjoy talking to him in the winter - so I can gloat.


About stacking filters: I usually have a UV filter on, and when I need a CPL, I'm simply too lazy to remove the UV one.

So I stack them.

Glenn