cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Items lost in the field

John_SD
Whiz

Well, **bleep**, I "lost" a circular polarizing filter in the field yesterday morning. What's worse is that I wasted an hour of good eary-morning light by the lakeside retracing my steps trying to find it, to no avail. It was a 67mm Tiffen, the first polarizing filter I bought for my Canon 18-135 STM lens. Inexpensive, but better than you might think, and certainly better than nothing. Better than losing the B+W.

 

I believe I had it screwed in securely, but must have loosened it as I turned the filter here and there while shooting. 

 

I believe this is a first for me. I consoled myself by recalling a conversation I had with a guy once who "lost" a ReallyRightStuff tripod. He was at the edge of the woods and had been shooting for a half-hour or so, and decided to take his camera off the tripod and go into the woods itself for a "couple minutes" to shoot there. When he returned about an hour later, the tripod was gone. I have a feeling he paid a bit more than $29.99 for that tripod LOL. But still...it sucks to lose items in the field. 

21 REPLIES 21


@John_SD wrote:

Well, **bleep**, I "lost" a circular polarizing filter in the field yesterday morning. What's worse is that I wasted an hour of good eary-morning light by the lakeside retracing my steps trying to find it, to no avail. It was a 67mm Tiffen, the first polarizing filter I bought for my Canon 18-135 STM lens. Inexpensive, but better than you might think, and certainly better than nothing. Better than losing the B+W.

 

I believe I had it screwed in securely, but must have loosened it as I turned the filter here and there while shooting. 

 

I believe this is a first for me. I consoled myself by recalling a conversation I had with a guy once who "lost" a ReallyRightStuff tripod. He was at the edge of the woods and had been shooting for a half-hour or so, and decided to take his camera off the tripod and go into the woods itself for a "couple minutes" to shoot there. When he returned about an hour later, the tripod was gone. I have a feeling he paid a bit more than $29.99 for that tripod LOL. But still...it sucks to lose items in the field. 


I feel your pain. A few years ago I apparently left the case for my 580EX-II on an excursion train somewhere in Pennsylvania. Oh, well (you'd think), so what? $5 or $10 buys a new one, and all is well. But no. Canon doesn't sell just the case, and the only Brand X replacement I could find was made for the older 580EX-I and is slightly too small. I bought it anyway, but it's less than completely satisfactory. I still use the flash occasionally, so I'm still a bit sore at Canon for their unwillingness to stock a replacement case.

 

The Red Sox won the World Series tonight, so I'm in a good mood. But your tale reminded me that good moods can be fleeting things.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA

I have lost stuff, too.  One time I was simply brain dead, and I am too embarrassed to say what I did.  It cost me $400.

--------------------------------------------------------
"The right mouse button is your friend."

Well, I feel a little better knowing that I'm not the only guy to lose gear out in the field. Speaking of which, my new 67mm circular polarizer arrived yesterday from B&H, which I plan to make use of Sunday morning. Hopefully, I won't lose this one.


@John_SD wrote:

Well, I feel a little better knowing that I'm not the only guy to lose gear out in the field. Speaking of which, my new 67mm circular polarizer arrived yesterday from B&H, which I plan to make use of Sunday morning. Hopefully, I won't lose this one.


You're lucky you can still use the polarizer. Polarizers have been rendered nearly useless in New England, because the sun almost never shines.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA

"Polarizers have been rendered nearly useless in New England, almost everywhere because of Photoshop."

 

Now Bob before you hit the panic button, I did keep "nearly" in your statement.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!


@ebiggs1 wrote:

"Polarizers have been rendered nearly useless in New England, almost everywhere because of Photoshop."

 

Now Bob before you hit the panic button, I did keep "nearly" in your statement.


And of course what you're prodding me to point out is that polarizers can do at least one thing that Photoshop can't do: remove reflections from bodies of water. PS can neutralize the reflection, but it can't show you what was hidden beneath the reflection.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA


@RobertTheFat wrote:

 

And of course what you're prodding me to point out is that polarizers can do at least one thing that Photoshop can't do: remove reflections from bodies of water. PS can neutralize the reflection, but it can't show you what was hidden beneath the reflection.


A polarizer filter can also do its’ job without adding as much distortion as Photoshop, [or Lightroom] would.

 

[EDIT]. Full disclosure, for the record, I use LR, so I do not use CPL or UV filters, anymore.

--------------------------------------------------------
"The right mouse button is your friend."


@RobertTheFat wrote:

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"Polarizers have been rendered nearly useless in New England, almost everywhere because of Photoshop."

 

Now Bob before you hit the panic button, I did keep "nearly" in your statement.


And of course what you're prodding me to point out is that polarizers can do at least one thing that Photoshop can't do: remove reflections from bodies of water. PS can neutralize the reflection, but it can't show you what was hidden beneath the reflection.


Another thing Photoshop can't do for you is protect your lens element when you're shooting at the tidepools around splashing salt water, or in the California deserts when the wind is blowing. Neutral density fliters can offer some protection, but they can't perform the double-duty polarizers do. And by shooting in the desert, I don't mean pulling off the road and shooting from the safety of a "Viewpoint." Photoshop would be fine for those snapshots. 

"Another thing Photoshop can't do for you is protect your lens element ..."

 

I am going to bow to that point and give you the gold star for the day. However, no matter how much Bob protests, PS can or at least the resulting photo will reveal anything the photographer wants it to.  It is just a factor of knowledge and talent about how to use/edit in PS.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!
Announcements