«

Can this just be screwed on in front of a UV filter that I use to
protect the lens or do I have to remove the UV filter first?

TIA

--
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross."
Sinclair Lewis

Yes. There could be some minor loss of picture quality though. I prefer to
keep the added glass to a minimum.


"Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
news:Mencken-...
> Can this just be screwed on in front of a UV filter that I use to
> protect the lens or do I have to remove the UV filter first?
>
> TIA
>
> --
> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
> carrying a cross."
> Sinclair Lewis

"Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
news:Mencken-...
> Can this just be screwed on in front of a UV filter that I use to
> protect the lens or do I have to remove the UV filter first?
>
> TIA
>
> --
> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
> carrying a cross."
> Sinclair Lewis
No, there is no need for a UV filter before or behind a polarizer. You can
leave it in place, but by so doing you are running the risk of image
degradation. My theory is the less glass there is in front of the lens the
better.

Jim

"Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
news:Mencken-...
> Can this just be screwed on in front of a UV filter that I use to
> protect the lens or do I have to remove the UV filter first?


The polarizer will absorb UV, and if your lens is multi-coated it probably
does not pass UV anyway. So there is no need to add a UV on top of a
polarizer.

With most modern lenses--30 years old and younger--the primary benefit of
the UV filter is for protection from dust, dirt, smudges and possibly
impact. If you leave your polarizer on your lens, it will do the same job.

BUT: polarizers require about 2 extra stops of light, so why would you use
one unless you needed it to darken skies or to minimize reflections? I use
a UV to protect my lens, and I take it off when I mount a polarizer. But
I'd never just leave a polarizer on the lens all the time.

"Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
news:Mencken-...
> Can this just be screwed on in front of a UV filter that I use to
> protect the lens or do I have to remove the UV filter first?

Except for the expensive ones, polarizers are usually uncoated. If your UV
filter is an inexpensive one, that's very likely uncoated too. Putting a
polarizer on top of it would therefore put *four* reflecting (as well as
dust-collecting) glass/air surfaces in front of the lens. I wouldn't want to
do that.

Neil

Ockham's Razor wrote:
> Can this just be screwed on in front of a UV filter that I use to
> protect the lens or do I have to remove the UV filter first?
>
> TIA
>

Like others have already said the polarizing filter can be mounted on
top of your UV filter. And yes you may introduce some image degradation
with the increased glass, although I dare say that most would not
notice. There is also the risk of vignetting when you stack filters,
the risk of this increases when using wider angle lenses.

Best option is to remove your UV filter before using the polarizer, but
if you are in a dusty or sprayey environment you might not want to
expose the front element of you lens to contamination

jon

In article <>,
"Neil Harrington" <> wrote:

> "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
> news:Mencken-...
> > Can this just be screwed on in front of a UV filter that I use to
> > protect the lens or do I have to remove the UV filter first?
>
> Except for the expensive ones, polarizers are usually uncoated. If your UV
> filter is an inexpensive one, that's very likely uncoated too. Putting a
> polarizer on top of it would therefore put *four* reflecting (as well as
> dust-collecting) glass/air surfaces in front of the lens. I wouldn't want to
> do that.

I have ordered a Nikon thin glass double coated polarizing filter. From
the price I would assume it is one of the "expensive" filters but do not
know.

My UV filter has one surface "coated".

--
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross."
Sinclair Lewis

"Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
news:Mencken-...
> In article <>,
> "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
>
>> "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
>> news:Mencken-...
>> > Can this just be screwed on in front of a UV filter that I use to
>> > protect the lens or do I have to remove the UV filter first?
>>
>> Except for the expensive ones, polarizers are usually uncoated. If your
>> UV
>> filter is an inexpensive one, that's very likely uncoated too. Putting a
>> polarizer on top of it would therefore put *four* reflecting (as well as
>> dust-collecting) glass/air surfaces in front of the lens. I wouldn't want
>> to
>> do that.
>
> I have ordered a Nikon thin glass double coated polarizing filter. From
> the price I would assume it is one of the "expensive" filters but do not
> know.

Yes, that should be good.

>
> My UV filter has one surface "coated".

I would still use the polarizer alone, not on top of the UV filter.

Neil

Neil Harrington <> wrote:

: I would still use the polarizer alone, not on top of the UV filter.

Stacking the two filters will not hamper the function of either filter.
And for some of us this works fine for our uses. But there is a possiblity
that stacking will increase the odds of reflections and thus many purests
avoid using any filter that isn't absolutely necissary for that shot. And
as others have pointed out the more stacking you do with a wide lens the
higher the probability of vignetting (the darkening of the corners of the
image). But for ease of use, under most situations you could stack the
filters with no problem.

One thought, unless you are shooting subjects that are moving or about to
disappear, go ahead and stack, and then look at the result. If there are
reflection problems or vignetting problems, then just take the time to
remove the unused filter and reshoot. On the other hand if this is a one
shot situation, and you have the time to juggle the filters, go ahead and
take the time to replace the UV with the Pola instead of stacking.

JMHO

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL

On Apr 27, 7:38 pm, Ockham's Razor <Menc...@pdx.net> wrote:
> Can this just be screwed on in front of a UV filter that I use to
> protect the lens or do I have to remove the UV filter first?
>
> TIA
>
> --
> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
> carrying a cross."
> Sinclair Lewis


I would take off the UV filter, mostly for the stated reasons and if
you are using even moderate wide angle the filters could create
vignetting or dark corners in your pics. Using the thin filter will
decrease the chance, but with the UV you no longer have a "thin"
filter. Never liked UVs and never missed one.

Tom