Although I used a polarizer quite frequently at one time, I now feel that it causes oversaturation and blocky looking colors in many cases. I'll use one for landscapes when the sky is pale or when haze and/or reflections are a problem. But that's about it. I do use yellow and red filters for B/W landscape photography, but I don't do much of that these days. I'm more into portraiture and people pics at the moment. (That of course is subject to change at the passing of a fancy:-) Paul
Ann Sanfedele wrote: > > Paul Stenquist wrote: > > > Pat White wrote: > > > > > > UV and Haze filters are similar, if not the same, and are neutral in color. > > > They're meant to reduce UV (naturally), which improves the look of distant > > > landscapes, among other things. You can leave them on all the time. > > > I use a UV filter only when needed to reduce distant haze. In other > > situations, it just adds another piece of glass reducing the efficiency > > of the lens and contributing to flare. Most filters are not multi > > coated, and even those that are generally are not up to the standards of > > pentax SMC lenses. The best filter for most situations is no filter. > > Paul > > While I have to say that I agree with the "clear lens cap" opinion re UV's - I'm > not > sure I go along with "the best filter in most situations is no filter" - depends > > a lot on what you shoot. For snaps of friends and other "people pictures" > in black and white, I'd pretty much agree. But yellow, orange and red filters > for > black and white shooting, more often than not, give more in quality than they > remove. And a polarizer is seldom off my 50 mm lens when shooting in color. > Necessary > to bring the scene to the print that you have seen with your eyes very often. It > > will provide reduction of distant haze and do so much more. > > early morning 2 cents from > annsan
