It is like catching a Marlin with a 18 lbs line. World class technique is required indeed. When you are awarded, only you and the Marlin is on the record, not the rod, line or reel.

I have a D610 which is capable to taking both raw and jpeg on separate card. I have never heard of camera capable of editing raw files.
Interesting to know, anyway even it can, I would still like to convert the raw in Lightroom.

It would be ideal if set up your camera according to the shooting environments or all manual settings and the pictures come out perfect that no need for post enhancement.
But most of the time many would come out less than perfect, such as face too dark, buildings too much perspective, too much HDR, too cold or too warm, but the facial expression is perfect that you don't want to discard. At that time, you wish you have shot raw.
I shoot both raw and jpg, but hardly find any from the raw is perfect(perhaps 5%), and I use Lightroom(which can do batch job and noise cancelling too) to process my raw. Sometimes, the pictures after LR are worse than the jpg version; that means I need to improve my shooting and LR skill

If you don't do post editing, you rely on your camera firmware to do the enhancement editing for you.
Try shoot in raw and use a raw-jpg converter to get the original image and see how much percentage of keepers.
Please anyone correct me if I am wrong.

try Faststone freeware, which I used it regularly to download and view my pictures.
R-click on a picture icon
choose tool,
batch convert,
select files to convert,
select advance option,
select size {1600 & 1200, downsized clear enough to show on the web},
choose the output folder,
then click [convert}

24-85mm 3.5-4.5 which I recently bought for $175 ebay is rated very well by Kendal

Thanks, I believe yours is an educated comment which the filter manufacturers have been tried to hide from consumers.
That is why I have read about no filter is better than any(or just UV) filter which reduces speed and induces flare. Any truth?
Can Dslr have built-in polarized filter or light reduction filter as well, can or can't this be done?
My Nikon D610 ISO setting allows me to setting to L0.3, L0.7 and L1.0 when tuned below 100. Should I set it to the lowest L1.0 before I use the light reduction filters

Thanks, I even blow my hot air into it, disregarding I have a pump blower and a micro-fibre in my bag.
Shall I use the solution used on car windshield which makes the rainwater or night-mist into beads.
Is glass filter better than non-glass type? It is sometimes difficult to tell one from the other. Does the sound of knocking it with a key render its material?

Thanks, even my cheap Vivitar polarized filter makes sky bluer or I can make the sky as blue as I want in Lightroom.
I know the multiple coatings will reduce ghost light when shooting against the sun or other light sources, what is the other advantages?
If a filter has coatings, is that meant that I should not touch it with my fingers or wipe it with my undershirt?
If so, one uses an expensive filter with multiple coatings, then he should use another protective filter on top of it.
Another question, if I shoot indoors, is it better(quality wise) to shoot without UV filter or any filter is good for flash lighting?

In what situation that I can tell the difference, night shorts, color, distortion?
I don't want to put on a BW which might cost even more than my $170 lens, or do you find it could be worth?

Ok since you ask. Is Altura better than Vivitar brand? or Hoya better than Tiffan? How do you justify?

I don't understand what you meant. Who need to spend more if one can't find the difference?

I am an amature photographer with Nikon610 How do I find out one filter(UV or Polarized) is better than the others just by the pictures; what criteria should I be aware?
My favorite lens is 24-85 AF 3.5-4.5G ($170 used) using the cheap Vivitar filter package(VU, Polarized, 10N 67mm) for only $13.
Should I buy a filter for over $50?
I don't want to buy something more expensive that I don't find them superior. Or does anybody buy filters just based on the reports?
I don't see reports of the inexpensive but rather reputable brands such as Vivitar or Altura; is it just because their quality is so inferior that they fall below the range?