Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,589   Posts: 1,545,876   Online: 1128
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,279
    Images
    12
    Just because you don't need a circular doesn't mean you should use a linear. The circular ones are basically all that anyone makes any more, so you might as well get a circular - there is no downside. What matters most is that (for you I guess) that it be "thin" (i.e. no front thread) and that it have multi-coating to reduce reflections and ghosting with high-contrast scenes.

    The Hoya HMC ones are good, the S-HMC and Zeta are apparently slightly better. Kenko is the brand used by Hoya in a few of their asian markets and is the exact same merchandise. B+W are great but poor value for money compared to the Hoyas. You can pay a bunch extra for a weather-sealed one ("B+W Kaesemann") too but I wouldn't bother.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    14
    thanks for the straight facts. I thought there would be a thing linear polarizer. I'll probably just go with Hoya or Kenko.

    Happy shooting,
    Sherwin

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by polyglot View Post
    Just because you don't need a circular doesn't mean you should use a linear. The circular ones are basically all that anyone makes any more, so you might as well get a circular - there is no downside.
    There are two.

    ' Difficult' to combine two circular polarizers.

    And they cost (quite a bit) more.

    If you do not need a circular polarizer, don't get one.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    14
    I'm hearing a lot of different opinions on here and at camera shops. One guy warned me that linear polarizers are stronger and less predictable.

    Essentially, I'm finding it hard to find a slim, linear polariser so i think i'll just have to go with the circular.

    There's this cheap Hoya:
    http://cgi.ebay.com.au/HOYA-55mm-Dig...item3f0623884e

    But how about this Marumi?
    http://www.2filter.com/marumi/marumidigitalHG.html

    I am buying two polarizers because I don't want to switch filters every time i switch lens. But my question is, if i buy a more expensive slim filter for my wide angle lens and a less expensive but same brand normal filter for my normal lens, will there be very noticeable differences between the shots taken on each lens?

  5. #25
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    What video camera are you using that makes it so you have to worry about vignetting when using a lens designed to cover 35mm still film?

    Also, be aware that if you move the camera (which I am assuming you will be doing, as that is what is done by "anyone half-serious about film," as you say ), the effect of the polarizing filter will change throughout the shot.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  6. #26
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Geelong & Castlemaine, Victoria, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,583
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by sherwin View Post
    I'm hearing a lot of different opinions on here and at camera shops. One guy warned me that linear polarizers are stronger and less predictable.

    Essentially, I'm finding it hard to find a slim, linear polariser so i think i'll just have to go with the circular.

    There's this cheap Hoya:
    http://cgi.ebay.com.au/HOYA-55mm-Dig...item3f0623884e

    But how about this Marumi?
    http://www.2filter.com/marumi/marumidigitalHG.html

    I am buying two polarizers because I don't want to switch filters every time i switch lens. But my question is, if i buy a more expensive slim filter for my wide angle lens and a less expensive but same brand normal filter for my normal lens, will there be very noticeable differences between the shots taken on each lens?

    The question you posed was "Best linear polarising filter [...]". Now its expensive vs inexpensive, linear vs circular and one size vs another. As you are metering manually and bypassing the in-camera metering, you do not need a circular POL, which are often more expensive and more prevalent than linear. Even the LEE filter system would benefit you. The "best filters", linear or circular, will be very expensive (take B+W, where the darling of the filter-fix set, Kaesemann, sporting posh (and very flat) Schott glass will cost around $400 for a 72mm (and B+W prices are heading north again). HOYA on FleaBay is a good buy (but do be aware of fakes!). Realistically, just one polariser — a low profile circular — should be sufficient and perhaps consider differing lens sizes with step up/down rings as required. Wouldn't this be easier (and cheaper)?
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

    A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
    —Anon.






  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by sherwin View Post
    I'm hearing a lot of different opinions on here and at camera shops. One guy warned me that linear polarizers are stronger and less predictable.
    Which, to set the record straight, is nonsense.

    As mentioned before, the working bit in both types is exactly the same.
    The circular contains an extra part, to 'unpolarize' the light again. That happens, of course, after the polarizer has filtered out the polarized light, so has no effect on how it works.


    Quote Originally Posted by sherwin View Post
    I am buying two polarizers because I don't want to switch filters every time i switch lens. But my question is, if i buy a more expensive slim filter for my wide angle lens and a less expensive but same brand normal filter for my normal lens, will there be very noticeable differences between the shots taken on each lens?
    Filters from different brands can vary in quality and effect, due to the polarizing foil they happen to use.
    The foil is a plastic, stretched to align the macromolecules in one direction to create something that works as a polarizer, and there are different qualities.

    The foil also has to be as near to neural in colour as possible, and again, not all are the same in this respect too.

    A cheap brand may (!) be cheap because they use a less good (and thus cheaper) foil.
    Or because they use aluminium for the mount.

    They could save a buck too by using lesser quality glass. That is: you could think so.
    The glass is only in the filter to protect the foil. So just about any clear bit of glass, polished flat, will do. And since the cheapest option is already all that is needed, the cheapest option is used, and there's no opportunity here to make a filter for less money.
    Do not be impressed by ad-texts that mention Schott. Schott makes very high quality optical glasses, with a range of strictly controlled parameters. The cover glasses in polarizers do not need fancy glass. So though Schott does indeed make many types of 'fancy' glass, none of that fancy glass is used in polarizers.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin