Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > What should I pay for a polarizing filter?

Reply
Thread Tools

What should I pay for a polarizing filter?

 
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2012
Because of aquisitions over the past couple of years, three of my most-used
lenses are now 77mm diameter. So imagine my irritation last weekend when I
reached for a 77mm circular polarizer and realized that I don't have one! My
largest polarizer is 67mm. :^|

So, off to the B&H Web site to find what I need. But it seems that the prices
of polarizers can now vary by a factor of five or six ($45 to $275, more or
less). So can you guys help me sort this out? How much does a serious
photographer have to spend? In the "old days" I'd have bought the $45
polarizer without a second thought. Should I reconsider that attitude now? Are
there actually important differences, or is it all marketing hype?

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Charles E. Hardwidge
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2012

"Robert Coe" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

> Are there actually important differences, or is it all marketing hype?


I've looked at some tests and read anecdotal evidence and there is a
difference.

The Hoya (HMC) multicoated filters are good enough but performance is
significantly better with the (HD & Pro) higher ranges. I thought I'd go for
one of those if I bought another circular polariser. The B+W ones are a
notch above at the higher ranges but not worth the money for my milk bottle
camera or anything I might take. Can't comment on any other brands as I lost
interest in them after an initial look.

I lost the links ages ago but there's a Polish (?) blog out there with
sample images which convinced me that Hoya HMC filters were good enough and
the better filters cut down another chunk of flare to make it worthwhile if
you were shooting under difficult conditions like streetlights at night.

Beyond a certain point I wonder if it's worth the bother as flare can have
an artistic quality and add a certain charm to photographs.

--
Charles E. Hardwidge

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2012
Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Because of aquisitions over the past couple of years, three of my most-used
>lenses are now 77mm diameter. So imagine my irritation last weekend when I
>reached for a 77mm circular polarizer and realized that I don't have one! My
>largest polarizer is 67mm. :^|
>
>So, off to the B&H Web site to find what I need. But it seems that the prices
>of polarizers can now vary by a factor of five or six ($45 to $275, more or
>less). So can you guys help me sort this out? How much does a serious
>photographer have to spend? In the "old days" I'd have bought the $45
>polarizer without a second thought. Should I reconsider that attitude now? Are
>there actually important differences, or is it all marketing hype?



I bought my 77mm CPL a few years ago. It cost me a lot of money but
has proved to be a wise investment. The brand is B+W, it is made in
Germany from Schott glass (Carl Zeiss Group), it is multi-coated and
is sealed at the edges. It is therefore completely waterproof. That
matters because you can use wet cleaning methods and the water never
penetrates the polariser matrix between the two sheets of glass. Also,
no problem using it in adverse weather or high humidity.

The ones with sealed edges are called Kaesemann.
<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/10889-REG/B_W_66_045620_77mm_Kaeseman_Circular_Polarizing.ht ml>
or
http://preview.tinyurl.com/9e4l72x

$144.95 from B&H with free shipping. Fine value IMHO.

You may be able to find a slightly cheaper version made by Heliopan.

 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2012
On 8/31/2012 5:54 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
> Because of aquisitions over the past couple of years, three of my most-used
> lenses are now 77mm diameter. So imagine my irritation last weekend when I
> reached for a 77mm circular polarizer and realized that I don't have one! My
> largest polarizer is 67mm. :^|
>
> So, off to the B&H Web site to find what I need. But it seems that the prices
> of polarizers can now vary by a factor of five or six ($45 to $275, more or
> less). So can you guys help me sort this out? How much does a serious
> photographer have to spend? In the "old days" I'd have bought the $45
> polarizer without a second thought. Should I reconsider that attitude now? Are
> there actually important differences, or is it all marketing hype?
>
> Bob
>


Both Bruce and Alan gave you good advice.



--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
otter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2012
On Aug 31, 4:57*pm, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Because of aquisitions over the past couple of years, three of my most-used
> lenses are now 77mm diameter. So imagine my irritation last weekend when I
> reached for a 77mm circular polarizer and realized that I don't have one!My
> largest polarizer is 67mm. *:^|
>
> So, off to the B&H Web site to find what I need. But it seems that the prices
> of polarizers can now vary by a factor of five or six ($45 to $275, more or
> less). So can you guys help me sort this out? How much does a serious
> photographer have to spend? In the "old days" I'd have bought the $45
> polarizer without a second thought. Should I reconsider that attitude now? Are
> there actually important differences, or is it all marketing hype?
>
> Bob


Consider it cheap compared to Lee filters.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2012
On 9/1/2012 12:36 AM, otter wrote:
> On Aug 31, 4:57 pm, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Because of aquisitions over the past couple of years, three of my most-used
>> lenses are now 77mm diameter. So imagine my irritation last weekend when I
>> reached for a 77mm circular polarizer and realized that I don't have one! My
>> largest polarizer is 67mm. :^|
>>
>> So, off to the B&H Web site to find what I need. But it seems that the prices
>> of polarizers can now vary by a factor of five or six ($45 to $275, more or
>> less). So can you guys help me sort this out? How much does a serious
>> photographer have to spend? In the "old days" I'd have bought the $45
>> polarizer without a second thought. Should I reconsider that attitude now? Are
>> there actually important differences, or is it all marketing hype?
>>
>> Bob

>
> Consider it cheap compared to Lee filters.
>


When I win the lottery I will get some Singh-Ray filters.



--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2012
On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:37:05 +0100, "Charles E. Hardwidge"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
:
: I lost the links ages ago but there's a Polish (?) blog out there with
: sample images which convinced me that Hoya HMC filters were good enough
: and the better filters cut down another chunk of flare to make it
: worthwhile if you were shooting under difficult conditions like
: streetlights at night.
:
: Beyond a certain point I wonder if it's worth the bother as flare can have
: an artistic quality and add a certain charm to photographs.

Or not. The times I've gotten flare on my photographs, "charm" wasn't one of
the words I used to describe it. ;^)

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
Charles E. Hardwidge
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2012

"Robert Coe" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:37:05 +0100, "Charles E. Hardwidge"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> :
> : I lost the links ages ago but there's a Polish (?) blog out there with
> : sample images which convinced me that Hoya HMC filters were good enough
> : and the better filters cut down another chunk of flare to make it
> : worthwhile if you were shooting under difficult conditions like
> : streetlights at night.
> :
> : Beyond a certain point I wonder if it's worth the bother as flare can
> : have an artistic quality and add a certain charm to photographs.
>
> Or not. The times I've gotten flare on my photographs, "charm" wasn't one
> of the words I used to describe it. ;^)


True.

I found the filter comparisons. You can look at the them yourself and
someone else's general impression of the Hoya HD filters.

http://www.lenstip.com/115.1-article...roduction.html
http://dpnow.com/6797.html


--
Charles E. Hardwidge

 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2012
On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 00:22:51 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: >Because of aquisitions over the past couple of years, three of my most-used
: >lenses are now 77mm diameter. So imagine my irritation last weekend when I
: >reached for a 77mm circular polarizer and realized that I don't have one! My
: >largest polarizer is 67mm. :^|
: >
: >So, off to the B&H Web site to find what I need. But it seems that the prices
: >of polarizers can now vary by a factor of five or six ($45 to $275, more or
: >less). So can you guys help me sort this out? How much does a serious
: >photographer have to spend? In the "old days" I'd have bought the $45
: >polarizer without a second thought. Should I reconsider that attitude now? Are
: >there actually important differences, or is it all marketing hype?
:
:
: I bought my 77mm CPL a few years ago. It cost me a lot of money but
: has proved to be a wise investment. The brand is B+W, it is made in
: Germany from Schott glass (Carl Zeiss Group), it is multi-coated and
: is sealed at the edges. It is therefore completely waterproof. That
: matters because you can use wet cleaning methods and the water never
: penetrates the polariser matrix between the two sheets of glass. Also,
: no problem using it in adverse weather or high humidity.
:
: The ones with sealed edges are called Kaesemann.
: <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/10889-REG/B_W_66_045620_77mm_Kaeseman_Circular_Polarizing.ht ml>
: or
: http://preview.tinyurl.com/9e4l72x
:
: $144.95 from B&H with free shipping. Fine value IMHO.

Yeah, that one caught my eye on the B&H site yesterday. I had about resigned
myself to buying a couple of them when I noticed that some ostensibly similar
filters were dramatically cheaper and others dramatically more expensive.
Which left me nothing but confused. But so far, everyone seems to be giving me
the same advice, so the B&W Kaesemann is probably what I'll end up with.

One point: Does that model let you put a lens cap on over it? The reviews I've
read complain that some of the thinner ones don't.

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2012
On 9/1/2012 8:25 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:37:05 +0100, "Charles E. Hardwidge"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> :
> : I lost the links ages ago but there's a Polish (?) blog out there with
> : sample images which convinced me that Hoya HMC filters were good enough
> : and the better filters cut down another chunk of flare to make it
> : worthwhile if you were shooting under difficult conditions like
> : streetlights at night.
> :
> : Beyond a certain point I wonder if it's worth the bother as flare can have
> : an artistic quality and add a certain charm to photographs.
>
> Or not. The times I've gotten flare on my photographs, "charm" wasn't one of
> the words I used to describe it. ;^)
>


Would it be fair to say that your word wold have qualified for the
upcoming SI?


--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wal-Mart's movie download plan: pay and pay again Modemac DVD Video 23 12-08-2006 02:40 PM
The battle moves on from why pay for an OS to why pay for an application(database) thing2 NZ Computing 40 02-18-2006 10:35 PM
polarizing filters Kancil Killer Digital Photography 5 09-09-2003 01:13 AM
polarizing filters mike Digital Photography 6 08-20-2003 10:35 AM



Advertisments