«

Just bought a 67mm circular polarisation filter for my cannon 20D. When
shooting outside in the daytime could the filter be left on in most cases.
Fit and forget so to speak. I know you can loose a few f stops but I
wondered, generally if there were any instances were it might not be a good
idea leaving it on.

In article <CTFJf.20393$> ,
" Luke Vader" <> wrote:

> Just bought a 67mm circular polarisation filter for my cannon 20D. When
> shooting outside in the daytime could the filter be left on in most cases.
> Fit and forget so to speak. I know you can loose a few f stops but I
> wondered, generally if there were any instances were it might not be a good
> idea leaving it on.

Yes you can leave it on if you don't mind the light loss. When shooting
under condition when the polarizer has no polarizing effect it would
simply work as a ND filter.

However, as it does cause a loss of light you would have to be careful
when shooting that you are able to get fast enough shutter speeds with
enough depth of field so that everything you want is in focus and you
don't have camera shake from too long a shutter speed. Also by always
using the filter you may end up setting your camera for a faster ISO
which may lead to extra noise.

So most people who want to leave a filter on for protection when not
using a polarizer would use either a clear protection filter or a UV
filter.

--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.

In article <CTFJf.20393$> , Luke
Vader <> wrote:

> Just bought a 67mm circular polarisation filter for my cannon 20D. When
> shooting outside in the daytime could the filter be left on in most cases.
> Fit and forget so to speak. I know you can loose a few f stops but I
> wondered, generally if there were any instances were it might not be a good
> idea leaving it on.

I guess it's OK if you like throwing away about a stop and a half all
the time. You might want to learn about photography before making
stupid statements though.

"Randall Ainsworth" <> wrote in message
news:180220060925376213%...


> I guess it's OK if you like throwing away about a stop and a half all
> the time. You might want to learn about photography before making
> stupid statements though.

I'm sorry. Didn't realise you were the administrator of this forum. Do I
have to have a certain level of competence in photography to dare ask a
question. Yes, I hope to learn more about photography, but not from people
like you.
Maybe you need to learn some manners.

In article <aHKJf.19857$> , Luke
Vader <> wrote:

> I'm sorry. Didn't realise you were the administrator of this forum. Do I
> have to have a certain level of competence in photography to dare ask a
> question. Yes, I hope to learn more about photography, but not from people
> like you.
> Maybe you need to learn some manners.

Hey! Put a couple neutral density filters on there and leave 'em there
while you're at it. They won't hurt anything either.

What is a polarizing filter used for? It's to reduce reflections from
non-metallic objects (at approximately a 30-degree angle) and to darken
blue skies (when the sun is at a right angle). So what useful purpose
would be served by wasting a stop and a half all the time and leaving
it on there? When photographing people, it can have some adverse
effects.

It was a stupid question that gets asked here a lot.

In article <aHKJf.19857$> ,
says...
>
> "Randall Ainsworth" <> wrote in message
> news:180220060925376213%...
>
>
> > I guess it's OK if you like throwing away about a stop and a half all
> > the time. You might want to learn about photography before making
> > stupid statements though.
>
> I'm sorry. Didn't realise you were the administrator of this forum. Do I
> have to have a certain level of competence in photography to dare ask a
> question. Yes, I hope to learn more about photography, but not from people
> like you.
> Maybe you need to learn some manners.
>
>
>

CP filters cut out a LOT of light, and should only be on the camera when
you have a need for it.

On the other hand a LOT of people put a UV or "skylight" filter on and
leave it all the time "to protect the lens" they say...

I simply make sure my Homeowners policy covers accidental damage of
"personal belongings" (cost about $13 a year for that). Instead of
putting a 50 or 100 dollar filter on the front of a lens that was
designed to work quite well without it! The lens MIGHT cost $2000 or
more, the filter isnt helping unless its NEEDED.

Larry Lynch
Mystic, CT

"Randall Ainsworth" <> wrote in message
news:180220061221425178%...
> In article <aHKJf.19857$> , Luke
> Vader <> wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry. Didn't realise you were the administrator of this forum. Do I
>> have to have a certain level of competence in photography to dare ask a
>> question. Yes, I hope to learn more about photography, but not from
>> people
>> like you.
>> Maybe you need to learn some manners.
>
> Hey! Put a couple neutral density filters on there and leave 'em there
> while you're at it. They won't hurt anything either.
>
> What is a polarizing filter used for? It's to reduce reflections from
> non-metallic objects (at approximately a 30-degree angle) and to darken
> blue skies (when the sun is at a right angle). So what useful purpose
> would be served by wasting a stop and a half all the time and leaving
> it on there? When photographing people, it can have some adverse
> effects.
>
> It was a stupid question that gets asked here a lot.

I agree .. this Q is like the Loch Ness monster, it keeps on surfacing ..
apparently people hear about it but never bother to lookup nor understand
anything about its working .. we'll have to learn how to live with that ..
eventually

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
> In article <aHKJf.19857$> , Luke
> Vader <> wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry. Didn't realise you were the administrator of this forum.
>> Do I have to have a certain level of competence in photography to
>> dare ask a question. Yes, I hope to learn more about photography,
>> but not from people like you.
>> Maybe you need to learn some manners.
>
> Hey! Put a couple neutral density filters on there and leave 'em there
> while you're at it. They won't hurt anything either.
>
> What is a polarizing filter used for? It's to reduce reflections from
> non-metallic objects (at approximately a 30-degree angle) and to
> darken blue skies (when the sun is at a right angle). So what useful
> purpose would be served by wasting a stop and a half all the time and
> leaving it on there? When photographing people, it can have some
> adverse effects.
>
> It was a stupid question that gets asked here a lot.

It wasn't an informed question, but it wasn't a stupid question.
It was simply a question asked by someone who didn't understand, and needed
an answer.

"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
news:5PLJf.47$vd2.15@fed1read04...
> Randall Ainsworth wrote:
>> In article <aHKJf.19857$> , Luke
>> Vader <> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm sorry. Didn't realise you were the administrator of this forum.
>>> Do I have to have a certain level of competence in photography to
>>> dare ask a question. Yes, I hope to learn more about photography,
>>> but not from people like you.
>>> Maybe you need to learn some manners.
>>
>> Hey! Put a couple neutral density filters on there and leave 'em there
>> while you're at it. They won't hurt anything either.
>>
>> What is a polarizing filter used for? It's to reduce reflections from
>> non-metallic objects (at approximately a 30-degree angle) and to
>> darken blue skies (when the sun is at a right angle). So what useful
>> purpose would be served by wasting a stop and a half all the time and
>> leaving it on there? When photographing people, it can have some
>> adverse effects.
>>
>> It was a stupid question that gets asked here a lot.
>
> It wasn't an informed question, but it wasn't a stupid question.
> It was simply a question asked by someone who didn't understand, and
> needed an answer.
>


I agree Mark. Our group moderators need to take a vacation.

Don Dunlap

In article <43f7892c$0$18969$>, imbsysop
<> wrote:

> I agree .. this Q is like the Loch Ness monster, it keeps on surfacing ..
> apparently people hear about it but never bother to lookup nor understand
> anything about its working .. we'll have to learn how to live with that ..
> eventually

But my favorite stupid question remains - Why can't I have a live
preview with my DSLR?