Two filters...worth it?

[MTD]

I was sold a lens filter to protect my lens and a polarizer for outside stuff. Is having both worth the cost?

[Richard_G]

Both my stills cameras and all my DV camcorders are fitted with Skylight 1B filters to protect the lens from dust and finger marks. I use a circular polarizer when conditions dictate. The conditions when a polarizer is beneficial is under blue sky in bright sunlight, it has the effect of making the sky look a deeper blue. See here for example shots http://www.tiffen.com/polarizer_pics.htm

Only you can say if they are worth it or not. The downside with a polarizing filter on a camcorder is that a lot of camcorders rotate the lens as they focus making a polarizer virtually impossible to use.

[MTD]

Hmm. My camcorder is a Sony DCR-HC20 if that is any help. As far as I know the lens doesn't rotate.

[mikel]

Unless you are dealing with low light conditions outdoors...I'd keep the polarizer.
It's also great for dealing with glare & reflections on glass or water.

[greymalkin]

definitely worth it...i have a few video's where i wish i had used my polarizing filter. Those types of things you just can't edit out later :P

[MTD]

Okay. I've heard of possible flares or ghosting when using the filters. Or is that just for digital cameras?

[Richard_G]

It isn't the type of camera that causes the flares, after all, the light doesn't know whether it's going to find a CCD panel or a lump of good old oxide of silver, it's crap quality filters.

[lordsmurf]

You can never have too many filters in your bag (only ONE AT A TIME on the lens!).

You never want to shoot indoor with a polarizer unless you're trying to avoid reflections off a shiny surface.

[ZAPPER]

Two filters at once? Or just having two filters on hand?

As I know it (And I could be wrong) A polarizer is for dealing with harsh or unwanted reflections. Most of the time these are undesirable on your footage because they cancel out portions of the subject that you are shooting. There are times when you may want it to happen for artsy effects, but adding it during the editing stage would probably cover those times. A weak polarizer or neautral UV filter on the end of your cam for general shooting isn't going to hurt anything too bad, even in low light. It should in theory help out like when you don't plan and over plan your shots for lighting. Say that you are panning a bike rider going along the beach, at some point or two you you could end up shooting into the reflection on the waves, or anything for that matter, this is when the polarizer does its majic and earns its keep as for its optical function. (Yeah I read the link above about not panning with a filter, but I live in a different world. If there is action in the shot as opposed to panning a landscape, nobody is really going to notice the sky getting cold)

When the sand or water at the beach gets on and scratches the filter instead or your camera lens, that's when it earns its keep as a see thru lens cap! I would rather have the false cold blue sky of a filter than a scratch on the lens any day! And like I said a weak filter is not going to make all that much difference. I have some sort of filter on every 35mm camera lens that I own, and none of them for the effect. If you want effect filters buy a whole set and a quick change adapter and play with them.

Now you can call me a hypocrite, I don't use a filter on my video cam.

I use a cheap wide angle lens. I consider it disposable (I don't know what it cost $20-$40?) I know that I will never be able to get the really long shots, the cam just isn't built for them. But I really hate not being able to get the close shots. My life happens within arms reach of me or maybe within earshot. When people interact with each other they are close, in the same room close, at the same table close, on the other end of the couch, next to you in the car. (You get the idea) Try sitting in the center of a room in your house and shooting one whole wall (Maybe my house is too small)

If you had a choice of getting a filter or a wide angle for the same price, I would do my damndest to sell you on a wide, but if outdoors is where you think that you will be shooting more, then get a filter. Either way atleast consider them as camera lens condoms and use them for protection!


Yeah, yeah. Zapper strikes again, Sorry.


Edit: What was the question? Oh yeah. Yes filters are worth "something" But I wouldn't use two at once.

[Jester700]

I'm strictly amateur, but I keep a UV filter on my cams as mentioned above - a "lens cap". Does the "1 filter rule" apply with that as well? I don't remove it when using ND or polarizing filters.

[lordsmurf]

Yes, the 1-filter rule still applies. Only use one filter, period.

[MTD]

Okay, so the UV filter I have, is just used for low lighting situations/indoor stuff? Then when outside when a polarizer is needed, I remove that and just use the polarizer lens?

[Richard_G]

Leave the UV on all the time to protect the lens. Only take if off when the conditions dictate that you need to use the polarizer. For instance, on a cloudy overcast day, the lighting is perfect for video, but a polarizer will have little or no effect so leave the UV on. If you have bright sunshine or reflections from water or glass, the polarizer will be worthwhile so use it. Have a closer look at what a polarizer will do on the link I posted above.

[ZAPPER]

Yep, what he says.


You may want to play around some with them to see what they will do. Set your cam up and start rolling tape, hold one filter in front of the lens for a moment and then the other. Change up your subjects and lighting conditions and repeat the test a few times. Have fun.