Polarizing Filters Falling Out of Favor?

[shamrock838]

Greetings,

When I got my Canon EF 100-400mm IS L recently, the sales guy at J&R recommended a UV fulter over the "haze" variety, saying the latter was all but useless. He also suggested the German import UV (Heliopan) that went for $60 or so ... reasoning anything less for my new lens was just so much "window glass." I bought it.

Not once did he mention a polarizing filter. Are they still in use or have they fallen out of favor ... or out of vogue? A 77mm model costs a pretty penny for a filter.

I also got to thinking about polarizers in light of aircraft shooting. Do any of you use rotating polarizers? I wouldn't think we had time to fiddle with these when trying to pan, zoom and capture moving airliners. Thanks.

Mike (shamrock838)

[T-Bird76]

I don't know anyone who uses their polarizing filter on a regular basis, Phil tried it once with some good results but for the most part it cuts down on the usable light. Get the UV but I'd hold off on the polarizer.

[pgengler]

I have a CPL (circular polarizer), but it's not big enough for my better lenses, and it's a cheap polarizer anyway, so it doesn't get use from that fact alone, but the other thing is that polarizers tend to be used for a very specific purpose, and you generally know you want it when you use it. This can be cutting down on unwanted reflections, darkening the sky, etc., but it's usually something you see in landscape photography and the like. For shooting planes (or most action, for that matter), it seems like it would just get in the way, since we rarely need polarization. It can be hard enough sometimes just panning with the plane; needed to fiddle with the polarizer would just make things more difficult, and it does cost you some light.

As far as UV filters go, I've heard that they don't really have as much of an effect with digital as they would with film cameras, but they're still great for protecting the front element of the lens. Some people think they're a complete waste ("Why would you spend >$1000 on a lens and then stick a cheap piece of glass in front of it?!") while others think it's worth it for the protection (only needing to replace a $60 filter in the event of an "incident", instead of repairing or replacing the lens for quite a bit more).