[AIr-2-Air] CPL or not to CPL?

[Leftcoast_Mike]

yesterday I picked up what I hope will be a great lens for a2a work, the 70-200 f/4 IS. I picked up a B+W UV filter for it but started thinking that maybe I should try a CPL since I won't be using a hood most of the time. The only reason I've not used one on my 100-400 is because I always have the hood on.

Just mulling over whether I should spring for it or just make due with the UV.

thoughts are much appreciated lol

[FlyingPhotog]

No Filters of any kind for A2A (and no Hoods either)

You don't want to lose anything over the side, out the back, through the hatch, etc...

[Leftcoast_Mike]

Originally Posted by FlyingPhotog

No Filters of any kind for A2A (and no Hoods either)

You don't want to lose anything over the side, out the back, through the hatch, etc...

I definitely no not to use a hood...but not even a filter eh? ok, fair enough. This is why I asked haha

[rammsteinmatt]

A filter unscrewing seems more difficult than having a lens hood fall out. More to the point, as you fly around polarization of the sky will change. Just one more thing to mess around with (rotating the filter) while flying about. Not sure about you, but when in an airplane the less I have to worry about the better; with the cramped nature, cost, and turbulent nature of air to air, simple is good.

I'll admit I've learned both of those things the hard way: 70-200 f/2.8 hood went out a bonanza window (filter didn't unscrew however), the v-tail was perfectly out of the way of the lens hood; the polarizer made the sky black in some of my pics as we orbited around snapping away.

[FlyingPhotog]

If it's designed to come off, it might at the worst possible moment...

Photographing someone off your wing mitigates damaging the subject but a filter falling at terminal velocity would probably kill someone on the ground.

Remember the lens that went through someone's roof last year?

[Leftcoast_Mike]

You both make great points...

I don't know how much of a pain it would be fiddling with a CPL in the confines of a tandem cockpit but maybe it's best I don't have to worry about it.

I also agree that anything that goes on, comes off and the CPL on my 17-50 has been known to come loose. A friend of mine dropped a blackberry out of a plane once and luckily it didn't hit anything but ground. Surprisingly it still worked...we were able to call it for nearly 2 days before it's battery died. We never found it haha

[PhotosGuy]

More on the subject (Jay's thread): (Air To Air)

Tips and advice for Air to Air shots

[ryanapem]

I always use a UV 'clear' filter and have never been worried about loosing it. One more than one occasion I've had stuff sucked out of the photo-ship but never anything attached to me or my camera.

As far as a CPL though, I've though about this quite a bit and my consistent conclusion is to leave the CPL on the ground. If for no other reason there is so much changing and everything is so dynamic you'll never have time to set up and adjust the CPL.

Now I have though about using an ND filter to get the aperture to a sharper range while still keeping the shutter speed I want but I haven't played with that yet. Maybe this summer (?).

[Leftcoast_Mike]

Thanks for those links, Frank!

Originally Posted by ryanapem

I always use a UV 'clear' filter and have never been worried about loosing it. One more than one occasion I've had stuff sucked out of the photo-ship but never anything attached to me or my camera.

As far as a CPL though, I've though about this quite a bit and my consistent conclusion is to leave the CPL on the ground. If for no other reason there is so much changing and everything is so dynamic you'll never have time to set up and adjust the CPL.

at the moment the only thing I use with great consistency is clear UV. I do have a CPL but never tried it on my tele's.

Great point about how things change up there. Having to constantly mess with the CPL would be a hindrance.