Need advice - Filters and Polarizers for 300mm Fixed Lens

Hello,

I will be heading to Alaska this summer and would like to try a polarizer with my Nikon AF-S FX NIKKOR F/4D IF-ED 300mm Fixed Lens.  The body I will use most of the time is the Nikon D500.

I would really appreciate some advice on polarizers and filters that others use with this lens.  I shoot as a hobby, so I don't need the highest end gear.

Thanks!

Hi, Wendy - 

Alaska in August can be rainy. What are you hoping to achieve with a polarizer? 
Since polarizers cut down the light -and often the speed - of a lens, I rarely use one if I'm not shooting water. Your lens takes a 77mm filter, and there are a number of inexpensive circular polarizers available. Amazon and Ebay are good places to look.  Hoya, B&W, and others would be fine if you feel you need a polarizer.

As far as the polarizer saturating colours, that can easily be done in photoshop,  instead of slowing down your lens with the filter.  
Re other filters, will you be shooting mostly landscapes? animals? birds? It makes a difference. 

You might also consider a teleconverter to give you more reach, like a 1.4x or 1.7x - however, these will also slow the lens down unless it's very bright out. They are fairly expensive, so you might consider renting them.
A good tripod and head would be important too (and this is from me, who rarely uses a tripod  :-)     ) 
If you'd tell us more about what you'll be doing and shooting, we can offer more suggestions.

Sandy
 

Hi Sandy,

Thanks for the response and suggestions.  I mistakenly said our trip was in summer, but I looked at the dates and realized it's late spring.  We decided to focus our time only on the Kenai Peninsula for this trip.

I shoot mainly animals and birds, but like to get them in their environment, so I may be shooting water scenes.  We will be taking day cruises out of Whittier, Seward and Homer.  We'll also be going to glaciers and lakes (hoping to get some reflection shots).

I have the following Nikon lenses, but won't bring all of them.  I need to think about replacing the 18-105 and 70-200 kit lenses with one lens.

-AF-S DX Zoom 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED
-AF-S FX 300mm f/4D IF-ED
-AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8G
-AF-S DX 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR
-AF-S VR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED IF

Thanks,
Wendy

Wendy:

A polarizing filter is one of the most important filters that you can carry and use, if used properly.  Yes it will cost you light as a polarizer will generally consume about 1 1/2 stops of light.  The purpose of a polarizer is to cut reflections.  It is NOT to saturate colors.  Yes colors will be cleaner and more saturated using a polarizer, but the reason is because it is cutting reflections.  There is NO software that can recreate the use of a polarizer when it is used properly.  Nik and Luminar both have post processing filters they have labeled as polarizing filters, but they do not recreate what can be done in camera.  I simply disagree with any advice you get that says you can recreate the effect of a polarizer in post production.  When I teach the use of filters, the polarizing filter is the prime example I teach and show examples of using one, and not using one.  

You should buy a polarizer that is large enough for your largest filter thread and then buy step down rings for other lenses unless you feel a need to have multiple lenses with polarizers on them at the same time. The step down rings are inexpensive (less than $10).  

You didn't really say how much you wanted to spend.  Here's a link to a B&W 77mm high transmission circular polarizer that I use.  It is $89.95.  This is a very good filter that doesn't break the bank.  

Here's the Link

Wendy,

I agree with Keith, that there is no software that can duplicate the benefits of a polarizer.  It's ability to reduce the specular (very bright) reflections off of wet/water surfaces is great.  It also works well in dry settings as vegetation can also produce specular reflections.  If you watch the histogram on your camera as you shoot, what you see with no polarizer (especially on a wet surfaces) is a histogram bunched in the middle or below with extended brightness.  With the polarizer rotated to maximum suppression, most of the brightness is suppressed with the bunched area spread fully throughout the sensor's dynamic range giving you much more subtlety in the colors and other details.  In a landscape shot with a polarizer, wide angle views (wider than roughly 35mm on a full frame sensor) will show distinct brightness changes across the sky that some folks find distracting.  It's important to keep in mind that the polarizer's effects are strongest at right angles to the sun, decreasing as you point towards or away from the light.

I would agree with Keith and Mark on this. A polarizer is the only filter I carry when shooting digital. It is one thing that cannot be "fixed" in photoshop. I consider it an essential filter. You won't use it all the time, but when you need it, you need it. 

Thanks all for taking the time to respond.  I really appreciate it.
I will probably go with the B&W and step down rings, as Keith suggested.
Best,
Wendy

I agree with the comments by Keith, Mark, and Harley--there is no substitute for high quality polarizing filter. B&W filters a re excellent.

For rainy or very dusty conditions, you might also consider either a Skylight 1a, or a UV filter. They will protect the front element.

I rarely use any filtration, except for a polarizer when needed.

You can increase the ISO setting to compensate for the light absorbed by the polarizer, up to a point, being careful not to introduce noise.
--P