Which one filter would you take? (Page 3): You asked a dozen or more people responded in almost full unanimity. Take the Polarizing filter!

Terrymaddy

You asked a dozen or more people responded in almost full unanimity. Take the Polarizing filter!

Markedel66

Why not variable ND?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Mcwane wrote:

If you were going on a trip to The Bahamas or south to Belize with a Full frame DSLR or mirrorless camera and you were going to do usual travel photography, people places and things even some landscape and If you could only take one filter, what one filter would you take with you? Thanks

Most probably, I would take a circular polarizer.

For video, though, it would be an ND64 neutral density filter (I have a mirrorless camera, so no issues with finder darkening to deal with).

In reality, I always carry four filters — Clear glass (for hazardous environments), Circular Polarizer, ND8 (–3 stops), and ND64 (–6 stops). Back in my heavy Ektachrome consumption days, I usually had about 30 in the bag... mostly for color correction.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Mcwane wrote:

If you were going on a trip to The Bahamas or south to Belize with a Full frame DSLR or mirrorless camera and you were going to do usual travel photography, people places and things even some landscape and If you could only take one filter, what one filter would you take with you? Thanks

CP!

cahale Loc: San Angelo, TX

ND4

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

TAKE THEM ALL YOU WON'T NEED TO TAKE AN EXTRA BAG FOR A FEW FILTERS.

Scruples Loc: Brooklyn, New York

Mcwane wrote:

If you were going on a trip to The Bahamas or south to Belize with a Full frame DSLR or mirrorless camera and you were going to do usual travel photography, people places and things even some landscape and If you could only take one filter, what one filter would you take with you? Thanks

There is nothing better than a clear Carribean Ocean Nighttime Sky. Oh Wait! Isn't those tiny points of light so unique now that you have a Star Filter on board.

Try a star filter!

I usually use my star filter for birthday parties and weddings. But every now and then it is fun to experiment.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Picture Taker wrote:

TAKE THEM ALL YOU WON'T NEED TO TAKE AN EXTRA BAG FOR A FEW FILTERS.

I like that reply.

The ONE I always take on trips is a GND.

Canisdirus

alx wrote:

That still doesn't make your statement correct. The effects of a polarizer cannot be replicated in post processing.

Lol ... yes it can.

alx Loc: NJ

Canisdirus wrote:

Lol ... yes it can.

Then obviously you do not know/understand a polarizer.

By removing reflected light, a polarizer can reveal details that are then recorded by the sensor. One example: a fish or other details/objects under water that are totally hidden by surface reflections. That cannot be replicated in post processing, period, unless you count hand "drawing" in pixels that were never recorded as photography.

That is only one case. Bringing out the green in foliage by removing the reflection of the blue sky is another. Tinting the area green in PP isn't replicating the effect - it is little more than childishly coloring with a crayon to replace color details obliterated by haze.

The colors of the Bahamas and Belize beg to be captured in their glory and a polarizer can do that.

Canisdirus

alx wrote:

Then obviously you do not know/understand a polari... (show quote)

Yes, that's about it ... reflected light. Minimal usage. Frankly, if you are down to using a polarizer for outdoor landscapes, wildlife.... you woke up too late.
I shoot during the same 5 hour (give or take) outdoor prime times....where a polarizer is unneeded.

Now if you are walking around snapping pics at noon.....go right ahead.
I would use a polarizer as well in that scenario.

But it's still a LOT harder to replicate an ND filter, than a polarizer.

alx Loc: NJ

Canisdirus wrote:

Yes, that's about it ... reflected light. Minimal usage. Frankly, if you are down to using a polarizer for outdoor landscapes, wildlife.... you woke up too late.
I shoot during the same 5 hour (give or take) outdoor prime times....where a polarizer is unneeded.

Now if you are walking around snapping pics at noon.....go right ahead.
I would use a polarizer as well in that scenario.

But it's still a LOT harder to replicate an ND filter, than a polarizer.

I did not criticize, much less attack, your choice of ND.

I merely pointed out the fallacy of your statement "All other filters can be replicated in post processing." A polarizer cannot be replicated in PP.

If the ND suits your style, vision, and lets you achieve your goal, by all means use it.

But, by your own admission, "it's still a LOT harder to replicate an ND filter, than a polarizer." You admit the ND can be replicated, just with effort. A polarizer still cannot be replicated, period.

Frankly, I'd travel with both to the Bahamas/Belize. But given the OP's stated "Which one filter" limitation, I, as well as the majority of responders here, would take the polarizer.

BTW, I woke up to polarizers when I processed my own color film. It was amazing the greens you could get photographing Kauai from a helicopter with a polarizer controlling the blue reflections in real time when you had no control over the hour, angle, etc. You couldn't even begin to approximate that with ND or PP.

Canisdirus

What I said was the ND is harder to replicate in post processing.
Which is correct.
Which is why if I had one filter to choose from .... ND ... every time.

alx Loc: NJ

And a polarizer still cannot be replicated.

Bill_de Loc: US

Picture Taker wrote:

TAKE THEM ALL YOU WON'T NEED TO TAKE AN EXTRA BAG FOR A FEW FILTERS.

All what? I think the OP said they are going to buy one filter to fit their new lens.

--