-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Is the Sony polarizing filter a good one?
- Thread starter janko10
- Start date
Asmordean
Forum Enthusiast
$100!!!
Ack! I bought a Tiffen Linear for $20US. The circular is $40 (52mm)
Ack! I bought a Tiffen Linear for $20US. The circular is $40 (52mm)
-----------------Asmordean
Mike Fitzgerald
Veteran Member
Jason —
I can't speak from personal experience (no 707 yet), but seeing nobody else has piped up yet I'll throw in what I've read.
I suspect the Sony is significantly overpriced. I've also read about unstable coatings but I can't remember where (or if it was the Sony at all).
What HAS come up repeatedly, though, is that the F707 does not require a circular polarizer. An ordinary linear one will be fine, so it comes down to overall manufacturing quality and physical depth (to avoid vignetting). That opens up your options somewhat. Hoya and Tiffen linear polarizers are both about $20 at http://www://bhphotovideo.com
Mike
I can't speak from personal experience (no 707 yet), but seeing nobody else has piped up yet I'll throw in what I've read.
I suspect the Sony is significantly overpriced. I've also read about unstable coatings but I can't remember where (or if it was the Sony at all).
What HAS come up repeatedly, though, is that the F707 does not require a circular polarizer. An ordinary linear one will be fine, so it comes down to overall manufacturing quality and physical depth (to avoid vignetting). That opens up your options somewhat. Hoya and Tiffen linear polarizers are both about $20 at http://www://bhphotovideo.com
Mike
Mike Fitzgerald
Veteran Member
astroguy
Forum Enthusiast
I haven't read the threads on polarizers, but I thought all auto focus cameras needed a circular one.
--'Gravity its not just a good idea its the Law' Astroguy
Ivo34672
Veteran Member
Nope. Just some SLRs need circular polarizers because of their AF optics (when mirrors are involved).
Digital cameras with "contrast detection" AF work flawlessly with linear polarizers.
Ivo
--Eyeglasses: Carl Zeiss
astroguy
Forum Enthusiast
Thanks for clearing that up for me I knew it had something to do with the split mirrors but was not sure.
--'Gravity its not just a good idea its the Law' Astroguy
Mike Fitzgerald
Veteran Member
I can't find the bookmark I had in mind, but here's some reading material meanwhile:
http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/photos/filters_uv_pol/#polq4
http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/photos/filters_uv_pol/#polq4
Mike Fitzgerald
Veteran Member
http://www.cliffshade.com/dpfwiw/polarizer.htm
Look at the home page for this site while you're at it ... some good stuff there. Luminous landscape is another excellent resource for techniques, ideas and comparisons:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com
Mike
Look at the home page for this site while you're at it ... some good stuff there. Luminous landscape is another excellent resource for techniques, ideas and comparisons:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com
Mike
I recommend a polarizer...
I was taught this... if the sun is bright enough that you need sunglasses... then so does your camera... you get much better color skies and it reduces the glare on metal, water, etc. I just came back from DC and have some great pics using the polarizer...
another one of those items you will not be sorry you bought... (if you take outdoor pics.)
frank
I was taught this... if the sun is bright enough that you need sunglasses... then so does your camera... you get much better color skies and it reduces the glare on metal, water, etc. I just came back from DC and have some great pics using the polarizer...
another one of those items you will not be sorry you bought... (if you take outdoor pics.)
frank
Asmordean
Forum Enthusiast
Also works great for when you are trying to shoot through glass.
Without it you will dance around trying to get the right angle to minimize reflections and have the proper framing. With one you just turn it a bit and reflections are minimized.
Good for shooting fish in a pool of water from overhead as well.
I thought a polarizer couldn't reduce reflections off of metal because the light was diffused?
Without it you will dance around trying to get the right angle to minimize reflections and have the proper framing. With one you just turn it a bit and reflections are minimized.
Good for shooting fish in a pool of water from overhead as well.
I thought a polarizer couldn't reduce reflections off of metal because the light was diffused?
-----------------Asmordean
Mike Fitzgerald
Veteran Member
True as I understand it. Evidently those reflections don't get plane polarized. Don't know why ... that's one for the physicists.
I'm guessing, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of some polarization occurring if there's a clear coating present — polish, lacquer or some other protective film. If the filter happens to help, well and good...
Mike
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum