New to photography - should I look at a polarizer filter?

caspertodd

TPF Noob!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
436
Reaction score
1
Location
Murfreesboro, TN
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I just recently purchased a Canon Xt, which is my first SLR. First off I am amazed at the difference between a $100-$200 point 'n shoot and a DSLR! I am still learning all of the functions of the camera, and am trying to learn proper ways to compose a picture instead of just taking snapshots of something. I know the affect of polarizers, and am looking at possibly buying one such as a Hoya Pro1 or a B+W multi coated circular polarizer. Is it too early for me to consider adding filters (other than a UV)? Should I just focus on just learning the camera first before getting into filters?
 
Hell, If you have enough spare cash, it can't hurt.

Not that I'd know of course :D
 
Agreed. If you know what they're for and can spare the cash, go for it. It just means you'll have experience with filters that much sooner.
 
I find polarizers indispensable.
 
I bought one two months ago and haven't used it yet. I've been busy learning other things. Buy it if you know what you want to do with it and you're ready to try it. Otherwise, save your money until you're ready for it.
 
What are you looking to shoot? They're indispensible for landscape photography. I saw you mentioned B+W filters. I recently picked up a multi-coated polarizer for my 18-200VR and it's top quality. You won't go wrong there.

But getting back to your question - if you're going to do a lot of landscapes with either a lot of sky or water shots, polarizer works very well. Another filter that is useful w/ digital photography is a graduated neutral density filter, particularly if you've a bright sky and you want to reduce likelihood of blown-out highlights.
 
Honestly, there's really nothing to learn about polarizers. You put it on and shoot. You may need to spin the lens until you get the proper orientation to take away the scatter, but other than that it's so easy a cave man could do it :) And yes, it is a good idea to use one!
 
I will be going to Rome, Italy soon, so I will be taking a lot of pictures outside of the Colloseum, Churches, many different fountains, Lots of flower covered streets. I'm sure the filter will help with the fountains, and maybe even the flowers... not sure on the rest.
 
Can't imagine not using a polarizer. I take a decent amount of waterfalls, but have used it regularly at gardens on fountains, etc...
 
The only thing I don't like about my polarizer is trying to take it off. It's probably the most frustrating thing for me.
 
I am not sure of wisdom in buying an expensive polarizer for lens that come with camera - unless you got the 5D + 24-105 kit :). Primary reason being size of lens - if you want "top notch" photos, chances are you will upgrade out of kit lens. Better lens will most likely be bigger so your expensive polarizer will not fit.

Play with your current set up, and if you think you are going to keep/use lens, go for a polarizer.
 
Buy the 90 dollar 50mm 1.8 Canon lens for your XT before you go on your trip. I just got mine and it never leaves my camera bag.
 
I am not sure of wisdom in buying an expensive polarizer for lens that come with camera

You're probably right. The one I'm looking at may be overkill for the lens that I bought. I bought a USM 75-300mm USM lense to get me up and going with taking decent shots out in my yard, on trips and at the zoo. Is there a polarizer that you would recommend that would be best matched with this prosumer lense? Maybe a Tiffen or Quantaray?
 
I believe Hoya Pro1 or B+W MRC Kaeseman (sp?) CPs will all run over $100 ... I think a couple cost more then the 75-300.

I've never used Tiffen nor Quantaray so do not know anything about their quality. If you can view your photo immediately, will not hurt to have one on lens. If you see distortion, remove CP.

I thought you were going to use CP with kit 17-85 :)
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top