Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dangerspouse" data-source="post: 788414" data-attributes="member: 46690">Do you have a link to that video? The one I watched several years ago from him was in regard to his argument about using UV, ND, and Circular Polarizing filters. ( <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcZkCnPs45s" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcZkCnPs45s</a> ). And even then, he only said you &quot;probably&quot; don't need one. He made the argument that post processing could mimic the effects of these filters, without risking possible degradation of signal from an extra layer of glass in front of your lens. And it's a lot cheaper.He did a follow up to that video fairly quickly to test filters in response to comments on the original video ( <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rBdqlBbNDE&amp;t=0s" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rBdqlBbNDE&amp;t=0s</a> ). It was very interesting, and if you are interested in the subject it's worth a watch.Again, he does add the qualifier &quot;probably&quot;, and indeed in the comments section he replies to one person's queries with, &quot;Yes, with fast lenses in bright light, an ND filter can be necessary to&nbsp; take a picture wide-open (depending on your camera's max shutter speed&nbsp; and minimum ISO).&quot; So he is not saying &quot;don't use filters&quot; across the board. It's a more nuanced argument, and I think a valid one for a lot of people.&nbsp;I know Tony takes a lot of stick from certain segements of photographers, but I found many of his videos to be extraordinarily useful when I was first starting out. He usually backs up his claims and explanations with actual test results, which is something many other channels don't. Agree with him or not, you can't say he doesn't put a lot of effort into his videos. The same goes for his wife Chelsea.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dangerspouse, post: 788414, member: 46690"] Do you have a link to that video? The one I watched several years ago from him was in regard to his argument about using UV, ND, and Circular Polarizing filters. ( [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcZkCnPs45s[/url] ). And even then, he only said you "probably" don't need one. He made the argument that post processing could mimic the effects of these filters, without risking possible degradation of signal from an extra layer of glass in front of your lens. And it's a lot cheaper. He did a follow up to that video fairly quickly to test filters in response to comments on the original video ( [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rBdqlBbNDE&t=0s[/url] ). It was very interesting, and if you are interested in the subject it's worth a watch. Again, he does add the qualifier "probably", and indeed in the comments section he replies to one person's queries with, "Yes, with fast lenses in bright light, an ND filter can be necessary to take a picture wide-open (depending on your camera's max shutter speed and minimum ISO)." So he is not saying "don't use filters" across the board. It's a more nuanced argument, and I think a valid one for a lot of people. I know Tony takes a lot of stick from certain segements of photographers, but I found many of his videos to be extraordinarily useful when I was first starting out. He usually backs up his claims and explanations with actual test results, which is something many other channels don't. Agree with him or not, you can't say he doesn't put a lot of effort into his videos. The same goes for his wife Chelsea. [/QUOTE]

Verification