«

For around $6, including shipping, it looks like I can routinely
get a 58mm glass circular poliarizing filter. Of course at that
price it's not a high-risk purchase, but I don't want to waste my
time if these filters are so bad that they can't be used. Has
anyone here tried one of these things? How did it work?

This would be for my Canon kit lens, whioh is not exactly L glass
to start with, and I would only use it occasionally.

Anyway, any *low-cost* suggestions would be appreciated.

In article <20110627->, Peabody
<> wrote:

> For around $6, including shipping, it looks like I can routinely
> get a 58mm glass circular poliarizing filter. Of course at that
> price it's not a high-risk purchase, but I don't want to waste my
> time if these filters are so bad that they can't be used. Has
> anyone here tried one of these things? How did it work?

you get what you pay for.

it's not going to be coated let alone multicoated. it may impart a
colour cast depending on the angle. the threads might not be exact and
it may get stuck on the lens. it's probably not a circular polarizer so
you'll have focus and exposure errors on an slr.

> This would be for my Canon kit lens, whioh is not exactly L glass
> to start with, and I would only use it occasionally.

you're going to put a $6 filter on a $1000 camera/lens?

> Anyway, any *low-cost* suggestions would be appreciated.

you'll need to spend a lot more than $6 for something decent. be sure
it's coated (ideally multi-coated).

"nospam" <> wrote in message
news:270620111031359903%...
[]
> you're going to put a $6 filter on a $1000 camera/lens?

Why not if, for just $6, you can learn something about what polarising
filters can and cannot do? If one can afford to lose $6 if it's rubbish,
very little lost.

Cheers,
David

In article <iuah9i$dt6$>, david-
d says...
>
> "nospam" <> wrote in message
> news:270620111031359903%...
> []
> > you're going to put a $6 filter on a $1000 camera/lens?
>
> Why not if, for just $6, you can learn something about what polarising
> filters can and cannot do? If one can afford to lose $6 if it's rubbish,
> very little lost.

And it may be fine. The 5 buck glasses I get from China are optically
every bit as good as the 300 buck glasses I get from Lenscrafters.
Chinese work cheap--that doesn't mean that they're incompetent.

In article <iuah9i$dt6$>, David J Taylor
<david-> wrote:

> Why not if, for just $6, you can learn something about what polarising
> filters can and cannot do? If one can afford to lose $6 if it's rubbish,
> very little lost.

you can do that for free online. or even visit a camera store to see
what they do.

sure, $6 isn't much but if it doesn't work properly, it's wasted money.

Peabody <> wrote:
>For around $6, including shipping, it looks like I can routinely
>get a 58mm glass circular poliarizing filter.

Are you sure it's glass?

> Of course at that
>price it's not a high-risk purchase, but I don't want to waste my
>time if these filters are so bad that they can't be used. Has
>anyone here tried one of these things?

Nope.

You might do as well to get a used UV filter and glue onto it a
piece of polarizing plastic that you saved from the last time you
saw a 3D movie.

--
Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
| The new GOP ideal

"Peabody" <> wrote in message
news:20110627-...
> For around $6, including shipping, it looks like I can routinely
> get a 58mm glass circular poliarizing filter. Of course at that
> price it's not a high-risk purchase, but I don't want to waste my
> time if these filters are so bad that they can't be used. Has
> anyone here tried one of these things? How did it work?
>
> This would be for my Canon kit lens, whioh is not exactly L glass
> to start with, and I would only use it occasionally.
>
> Anyway, any *low-cost* suggestions would be appreciated.

Have a look at this:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011...th-bad-filters

Especially the bumper sticker shot through 5 good UV filters and 5 cheap
filters.

MG

On 2011-06-29, Neil Harrington <> wrote:
> In my experience even the cheapest polarizers from eBay sources polarize
> just fine, which is all I expect them to do. Like you, I use polarizers only
> occasionally and the expensive brands would just be wasted money for me. I
> would be very surprised if anyone could really tell the difference between a
> shot made with a $6 polarizer and one costing 10 or 20 times that much.

OTOH, I got a cheap ND filter, and it was aweful. Uneven density,
blurred details, and a green cast. Not very useful. As some have said,
it can be quite hit and miss on the quality.

--
Bruce Guenter <> http://untroubled.org/

Bruce Guenter says...

>> In my experience even the cheapest polarizers from eBay
>> sources polarize just fine, which is all I expect them
>> to do. Like you, I use polarizers only occasionally and
>> the expensive brands would just be wasted money for me.
>> I would be very surprised if anyone could really tell
>> the difference between a shot made with a $6 polarizer
>> and one costing 10 or 20 times that much.

> OTOH, I got a cheap ND filter, and it was aweful.
> Uneven density, blurred details, and a green cast. Not
> very useful. As some have said, it can be quite hit and
> miss on the quality.

Well I ended up ordering a Zeikos CPL filter from Amazon for
$5.76 and free shipping. It's a glass filter and claims to
be multi-coated. I don't have high hopes for it, but I
could get lucky. The reviews on Amazon are bipolar - one
group rates it very high, another very low, with nobody in
the middle. So it appears to just be luck of the draw as to
what you get. Anyway, I'll post a report when it comes in.

Well I received the cheap CPL filter from Amazon, and it
appears to work just fine. It definitely works on
reflections and the sky, at least at certain angles, and
after taking just a few pictures with it, I don't see any
degradation of the picture - sharpness or whatever. So I
guess I got a good one. Certainly worth $5.76.

The only downside so far is that I can't use the lens hood
I've been using.