 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / General Topics / February 2006Circular Polarizer Filters
Hi all, Anyone has sample photos with/out circular polarizer filters? Jay. I bought a circular polarizer last year for my digital camera, and I was disappointed with the polarizing effect, compared to what I had with the regular polarizers on my film cameras. It was a Sunpak, and I don't think I would recommend it. I was greatly interrupted by hurricane Katrina, so I didn't get to try it again until last week, but it wouldn't even remove reflections from glass. I can't believe that this is due to the nature of a "circular" polarizer, so I suspect that I shot myself in the foot with this brand. If I'm wrong, I would welcome some comments.  SignatureStan Beck From New Orleans to Brandon MS To reply, remove -101 from address. *** > Hi all, > > Anyone has sample photos with/out circular polarizer filters? > > Jay. A good circular ploarizer is expensive, at least $75. > I bought a circular polarizer last year for my digital camera, and I was > disappointed with the polarizing effect, compared to what I had with the [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > > > Jay. > I bought a circular polarizer last year for my digital camera, and I was > disappointed with the polarizing effect, compared to what I had with the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > If I'm wrong, I would welcome some comments. I believe you are [wrong]. Circular polarizers are no different (in terms of the quality that you get) from "regular" polarizers -- they just have an additional phase- shifter of lamda/4 to make the resulting light circularly polarized, and so, the fact that it is reflected off an internal mirror does not wildly affect the adjustments of the camera (the light-meter, etc.). But you can get spectacular images with circular polarizers -- as much as with regular polarizers. The following, though far from spectacular, shows a little bit the effect: With circular polarizer: http://www.mochima.com/personal/fotos_varias_2001_10_27/mauricie_ranita_con_pola rizador.jpg Without polarizer: http://www.mochima.com/personal/fotos_varias_2001_10_27/mauricie_ranita_sin_pola rizador.jpg (I hope your newsreader does not split the line into two -- if so, glue them together manually onto your browser's addressbar) The following page contains almost exclusively photos taken with a circular polarizer: http://www.mochima.com/personal/gaspe_2001_09/parc_forillon.html And in the following, the second and third photos are taken with circular polarizer: http://www.mochima.com/personal/gaspe_2001_09/parc_de_la_gaspesie.html HTH, Carlos -- arlos: CHEAP circular polarizers do indeed suffer from poorer efficacy. > > I bought a circular polarizer last year for my digital camera, and I was > > disappointed with the polarizing effect, compared to what I had with the [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > Carlos > -- Carlos, Many thanks for the information. Could you please also mention brand names you used. Jay. >> I bought a circular polarizer last year for my digital camera, and I was >> disappointed with the polarizing effect, compared to what I had with the [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Carlos > Carlos, > Many thanks for the information. Could you please also mention brand names > you used. I think all of the images in the links I sent are taken with the Nikon (it's the 77mm model). I first thought the one of the frog (the with and without) had been taken with my brother's old camera (a Canon, with a B&W circular polarizer, I believe), but no, on second thought, I think those ones were also taken with my camera (it was my "new camera" then :-)). These ones, I took a while ago with my brother's camera, a Canon, and his polarizer -- as I said, from what I remember it was a B&W: http://www.mochima.com/personal/Mochima/Mochima6.jpg http://www.mochima.com/personal/Mochima/PtoLaCruz1.jpg http://www.mochima.com/personal/Mochima/Medina.jpg http://www.mochima.com/personal/Mochima/Araya1.jpg Those I'm 100% sure were taken with my brother's camera -- as you can see, the polarizer works nicely, and it does give you a good image (that is, it works nicely as a polarizer and it does not introduce any defects or obvious deterioration to the image). He now has a Nikon D70, with a B&W polarizer -- he just came back from his vacation in Cuba, and I can tell you the pictures he showed us are truly spectacular!! (and most of them were taken with polarizer -- you know, being beach and sunny images). I don't think he's put them online yet, but I'll ask him and if he's ok with it I'll post a link, making reference to this polarizer discussion. HTH, Carlos -- Thanks, Carlos. That's kind of what I expected to get, but that's not what I'm getting. I've used polarizers off and on for about 30 years, so I know how to use them, but I really think that my filter is the problem. Any suggestions for a brand, for next time? SignatureStan Beck From New Orleans to Brandon MS To reply, remove -101 from address. *** >> I bought a circular polarizer last year for my digital camera, and I was >> disappointed with the polarizing effect, compared to what I had with the [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Carlos > Thanks, Carlos. That's kind of what I expected to get, but that's not what > I'm getting. I've used polarizers off and on for about 30 years, so I know > how to use them, but I really think that my filter is the problem. Any > suggestions for a brand, for next time? The one I have is a Nikon (I think I paid something around $120 for it -- it's a 77mm). I believe my brother has a B&W and he also gets quite good results (it's also a circular polarizer, that is), for something around $60 or $80, if I'm not mistaken. Cheers, Carlos -- > B&W and he also gets quite good results (it's also a circular B+W Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > I've used polarizers off and on for about 30 years, so I know how to use > them, but I really think that my filter is the problem. Any suggestions > for a brand, for next time? Heliopan. Singh-Ray. Money's no object, right? SignatureStan Beck From New Orleans to Brandon MS To reply, remove -101 from address. *** >> I've used polarizers off and on for about 30 years, so I know how to use >> them, but I really think that my filter is the problem. Any suggestions [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Money's no object, right? LOL, I wish. But I guess it will be money well spent. > Thanks, Carlos. That's kind of what I expected to get, but that's not what > I'm getting. I've used polarizers off and on for about 30 years, so I know > how to use them, but I really think that my filter is the problem. Any > suggestions for a brand, for next time? I use Minolta 72mm and 55mm circ-pol which work great, but do vignette easily at wide apertures as they are quite thick in build. It is important to remember that the polarizing effect is the greatest when the light source is at 90° to the lens axis. For once, rule of thumb means something: Make a pistol with your hand with your thumb straight out. Point at your subject with your index finger and turn your wrist to point your thumb at the light source. If this can be done, then the polarizer can be used to maximum effect. The other overlooked item is wide angle. If the lens covers (eg) a 90 x 60° (or so) field of view, then the polarizer is only effective over about a third of the image. So you can end up with a large exposure difference across the field of view. It can look great or terrible depending on how you take advantage of it (or not). On slide film, you need to be especially careful. (See how dark this is on the right where the polarizer had effect, v. the left which was close to the light source direction. About 70° beteen the sun and the right of the frame) http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/37709986 Cheers, Alan. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.