Voyager1 Loc: Fort Myers, FL

With the thinner air, glaciers and possibly full sun is a UV or CP filter better at 7,000 feet?

Nikon D5500, f/1.8 35mm DX prime lens and 18-55 mm and 55-300 mm kit lenses.

phlash46 Loc: Westchester County, New York

A CP would be useful with all the glare.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

I live in Oregon,. I regularly shoot landscapes at 7000 ft +/- 2000ft. In the film days a UV was definitely needed. With my digital cameras (Sony & canon) I have not noticed any difference with or without a UV. Unlike film, the sensors seem to not see UV spectrum. I would definitely use a polarizer. If you haven't used one before, there are two kinds. Ones that you manually rotate to get the darkest sky and reduce reflections and the circular ones that make no difference if they are rotated or not. I find that the manually rotation filters tend to be more effective. Do not worry about exposure corrections. Your camera light meter will compensate. Note that you live at sea level, you may feel some light headedness, headaches, and shortness of breath at altitude. It may take 2-3 days to accumate. Enjoy the hot chocolate and glaciers. Don't forget to bring power adapters to be able to charge your batteries. Happy Shooting

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

The camera sensors are definitely sensitive to UV light, and that is why in every camera there is already a filter to remove UV light (and also IR light). So the quick answer is that it is already taken care of for you.

A for a polarizing filter, you use it as needed and you learn to sense when those situations are present. You may not like the effect the polarizer gives in some scenes. And others, you can't live without it. If there is glare from different directions, it can help a lot. But watch the sky which can darken a lot. Perhaps you like a dark sky, perhaps you don't. You will need to figure that out.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

At altitude the sky is deeper(more saturated) and that could obviate many peoples reason for using a polarizer. Although I have been boxed in at altitude more often you are looking at wide vistas. If you use the polarizer to reduce glare under that circumstance your sky will vary in intensity. You need to keep that in mind and decide what is important to you.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Digital doesn't require a UV filter (film did, especially at higher altitudes).

A Circular Polarizer would be FAR more helpful for scenic shots, controlling glare and reflections, deepening the blue of the sky, etc.. But you need to be careful at higher altitudes. Where the atmosphere is thinner, the effect of the C-Pol will be stronger and it's possible to overdo it, to make the skies go too deep blue, even black (though prob. not at 7000 feet, which really isn't that high altitude).

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Could you please point to an example of the second type of circular polarizers that don't require rotation to adjust the strength of the filter's effect?

I'm not familiar with those.

jcboy3

Yes, there are two kinds of polarizing filters. No, you are wrong in what these are.

The two kinds of polarizing filters are linear and circular. The linear polarizing filter will filter light based upon the plane of the light wave; it will produce light that is generally oriented in one plane and remove light that is generally oriented in the perpendicular plane. Thus, it reduces the light intensity by about 1/2. Stronger linear polarizing filters will reject more out-of-plane light, and further reduce overall light. The filter can be rotated to adjust the plane that the filter affects; this is useful because reflected light tends to be polarized by the reflecting surface, so the polarizing filter can be rotated to align perpendicular to the polarized plane of the reflected light and thus filter it out.

Circular polarizing filters were designed to solve the problem of using a linear polarizing filter with an SLR/DSLR camera. The SLR/DSLR camera uses a partial transmission mirror to provide light to the autofocus and metering systems. Changing polarity of light affects the amount of light that is transmitted, causing problems with autofocus or metering. The circular polarizing filter adds a second filter (quarter-wave filter) to the linear polarizing filter that converts the linearly polarized light into circularly polarized light; essentially it de-polarizes the light uniformly. As a result, the circular polarizing filter only works if the light passes first through the linear polarizing filter; if it passes through the quarter-wave filter first, then the polarized light is de-polarized and the linear polarizing filter will not filter the polarized light as intended.

Variable neutral density filters use two polarizing filters to change image intensity. If two linear polarizing filters are rotated with respect to each other, the light output is gradually reduced as the second polarizing filter gradually filters the polarized light coming from the first. Again, for use with SLR cameras, the second filter is actually a circular polarizing filter. In this case, the filter will work in both directions; it is not intentionally reducing polarized light but rather all light. However, it still needs to be oriented correctly if used with an SLR/DSLR camera.

Note that mirrorless cameras are not subject to the same limitations, and regular linear polarizing filters can be used.

At any rate, both types of filters require manual rotation to align with the polarized light that is intended to be filtered.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Thanks for explaining the two types of polarizes greatly appreciated. linear is generally labeled POL and has a marker or little handle to rotate it. The circular polarizer is labeled CPL and may not have a marker or handle to rotate it. Happy Shooting.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

No. At altitude, a CPL is what is needed. You will bring out the deepest blue of the sky. I regularly shoot at 8000 - 10,000 feet in California's Owens Valley with excellent results.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

UV filters are still a good idea, shooting digital. Sensors are sensitive to UV rays, only to a lesser degree than film is!!

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

"the circular ones that make no difference if they are rotated or not" really???
--Bob

Tet68survivor Loc: Pomfret Center CT

On my Facebook page, I have photos of my work on Mt. Washington in NH (6288 ft)! Both Summer and winter! I did nothing special with my Nikon DSLR! No filters etc. Pictures get great raves from other photographers, and yes maybe some filters would have made a great picture better! By the way, Mt. Washington has the "World"'s worse weather"! Not my saying, the National Weather Service! 231 mph winds, etc. There's two photos of me outside at a balmy -6° in the sunshine and 30 minutes later -60° covered in ice!

Tet68survivor Loc: Pomfret Center CT

Posting two photos of Mt. Washington NH 30 minutes apart somewhere on this site!