Filters- Clear vs. Polarized: Recently got a slightly used Nikkor AF-S 28-300 3.5-5.6 lens without a filter for my Nikon D750. Thinking I would get a Hoya but expensive so was...

jkphotos

Recently got a slightly used Nikkor AF-S 28-300 3.5-5.6 lens without a filter for my Nikon D750. Thinking I would get a Hoya but expensive so was wondering if I should get a clear or polarized filter. Any other suggestions would be appreciated.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

What is the purpose of the filter? If for protection only, clear is fine as UV light does not effect digital sensors as it did for film. Unless you go with the highest quality glass, such as Hoya or B+W XS-Pro, you might be better off with no filter and just always have your hood on your lens when in use and the cap when not.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

If you are going to be shooting landscapes often you will be better served using a polarizer. Polarizers saturate colors, darken a blue sky when used 45 degrees to the sun, eliminate non metallic reflections and it is said, I never used one for that purpose, that it helps to clear haze.
Something very important, make sure it is a good quality filter and make sure that lens surface and filter are clean when you use them. Forget about using a polarizer with matrix metering since the darkness of the filter will confuse the meter and your meter readings will not be accurate.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Get both. I prefer B+W filters. The polarizer will enable you to darken skies, reduce reflections, etc. The clear will protect your lens' front element. There are, however, a few shooting situations where you'd want neither.
--Bob

jkphotos wrote:

Recently got a slightly used Nikkor AF-S 28-300 3.5-5.6 lens without a filter for my Nikon D750. Thinking I would get a Hoya but expensive so was wondering if I should get a clear or polarized filter. Any other suggestions would be appreciated.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

jkphotos wrote:

Recently got a slightly used Nikkor AF-S 28-300 3.5-5.6 lens without a filter for my Nikon D750. Thinking I would get a Hoya but expensive so was wondering if I should get a clear or polarized filter. Any other suggestions would be appreciated.

Clear would offer some protection from dust, water, etc., but if you use a Xume magnetic adapter, you can have that filter on and off in less than a second. I often hve a clear filter on my 28-300mm, but I can pop it off to take a shot. a lens hood also offers protection.

Protective filters -
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/06/the-comprehensive-ranking-of-the-major-uv-filters-on-the-market/
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/UV-and-Clear-Lens-Protection-Filters.aspx

UV Filters -
https://www.howtogeek.com/355998/what-is-a-uv-filter-and-do-you-need-it-to-protect-your-camera-lens/
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/06/the-comprehensive-ranking-of-the-major-uv-filters-on-the-market/
http://www.lenstip.com/113.1-article-UV_filters_test_Introduction.html
http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/2262/are-digital-sensors-sensitive-to-uv

RPaul3rd Loc: Arlington VA and Sarasota FL

I have learned the hard way that, besides a good lens, the one thing you don't skimp on are the filters to protect the lens. Polarizing filters are great for scenery but they can be killers because of their effect on exposure which can mean a loss of up to 2 F stops. If you shoot mostly outdoors, a polarizing filter is a fine thing to have but if you shoot your scenic and then go indoors, you lose 2 F stops of incoming light which either will tell you to use a flash, or, if you're in a cathedral where flashes are generally not allowed, cause your camera to slow shutter speed causing blur or reducing the F stop to cause narrow depth of field. SO ... after this sermon ... I recommend a UV Haze filter. Hoya is a good brand. So is Tiffen. I use BW, a German brand, because I've been using them for years. Protecting the lens on your camera should be of paramount importance. PS: I do carry a Polarizing filter with me at all times JUST IN CASE I want that effect when I'm outdoors.

jkphotos

Thank you all for the excellent and quick responses!

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

jkphotos wrote:

Recently got a slightly used Nikkor AF-S 28-300 3.5-5.6 lens without a filter for my Nikon D750. Thinking I would get a Hoya but expensive so was wondering if I should get a clear or polarized filter. Any other suggestions would be appreciated.

If you believe you need a filter for lens protection, and there is always a big debate about whether that is true, a polarizer is probably not a good choice to leave on your lens all the time. It is only useful in certain circumstances, to darken skies or reduce reflections, and you do lose a couple stops of light.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

jkphotos wrote:

Recently got a slightly used Nikkor AF-S 28-300 3.5-5.6 lens without a filter for my Nikon D750. Thinking I would get a Hoya but expensive so was wondering if I should get a clear or polarized filter. Any other suggestions would be appreciated.

Personally, I do not use clear filters, they are a waste of money and there has not been a clear filter produced that IMPROVES your images, so why use one. Always make sure to have your lens hood attached, that is the best protection for your lens.
If you want to enrich colors are get a really great blue sky, or you want to eliminate glare in your photo's then get a polarizing filter. And they are not that expensive. Make sure you get a circular one.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=hoya%20circular%20polarizer&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ps

Dikdik Loc: Winnipeg, Canada

CHG_CANON wrote:

you might be better off with no filter and just always have your hood on your lens when in use and the cap when not.

I may be wrong here, but, even with my Nikon F2... I used a clear filter so I didn't have to use the lens cap. It got in the way and I kept losing them...

Dik

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Dikdik wrote:

I may be wrong here, but, even with my Nikon F2... I used a clear filter so I didn't have to use the lens cap. It got in the way and I kept losing them...

Dik

You're not wrong; there are many people on both sides of the question. I'm on the no filter side, but I always use a lens hood.

Grimmster Loc: New Jersey

Use the hood. Spend the extra cash on the B+W polarizer. If you have never used one, your going to love it.

Richard Engelmann Loc: Boulder, Colorado

I watched a Youtube video which had demonstrations of strong impact on lenses versus filters. It was silly because the protection you really need is to the lens's filter ring and the front element itself when in sandy/windy/salt mist environments. The additional optical layer will affect certain situations where a bright source creates a flare on the filter. In that case, take it off or use a hood.

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

camerapapi wrote:

If you are going to be shooting landscapes often y... (show quote)

I've always read A polarizing filter will be capable of its maximum effect when one's line of sight is perpendicular to the direction of the sun: (90 degrees)

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

rmalarz wrote:

Get both. I prefer B+W filters. The polarizer will enable you to darken skies, reduce reflections, etc. The clear will protect your lens' front element. There are, however, a few shooting situations where you'd want neither.
--Bob

Ditto on Bob's suggestions.