polarized filters whats the difference? nikon vs $10 one

[PatrickHMS]

Every digital camera has a UV filter (among others) in front of the image sensor, that's why they don't need one on the lens.

That's interesting - never knew that!

I've been shooting without "protective" filters for awhile now, only use CPL and ND, sometimes 4 point star filter, but still, when I use camera without filter, makes me kind of uneasy bc of so many years of having been conditioned to think thataway about "needing" a filter to protect the front glass of the lens.

 

[jbylake]

I haven't read where anyone mentioned that the quality of the glass used, has any affect on the quality of the filter.

Second, I disagree with anyone who says UV lenses are worthless, except for lens protection. They are great for excess glare, in conditions where you can't control it otherwise.

Example, I'll shoot into a stream of trout with a UV filter. You shoot into it with nothing. Let's see if there is a difference.

J.

That's what a circular polarizing filter (CPL) does, not a UV.

Every digital camera has a UV filter (among others) in front of the image sensor, that's why they don't need one on the lens.

Yeah, my bad. Oh well, when you stick foot in mouth, just try to hop on one leg. Stick both in, then bounce on ass..:lmao: Oh, and I was thinking film, so no UV filter on "sensor"...

J.:mrgreen: