Canon f/2.8 300 IS USM II - CPL vs. No CPL w/1DX

I'm using a Canon f/2.8 300 IS USM II with a 1DX to shoot water sports and optimizing shots by reducing glare on backlit subjects, over bright water, with bright blue sky, "could be ideal".

Has anyone out there had experience with the Canon 52mm drop in CPL on the 300?

I'd like to see some shots or get your opinion on the exp.

And... has anyone noticed enhanced issues with shadows, banding or noise in PP with PS or LR with the CPL.

Thank you,

TV

http://mediamaze.tumblr.com/

http://www.pixoto.com/filcro.mediastaffing

tvstaff wrote:

I'm using a Canon f/2.8 300 IS USM II with a 1DX to shoot water sports and optimizing shots by reducing glare on backlit subjects, over bright water, with bright blue sky, "could be ideal".

Has anyone out there had experience with the Canon 52mm drop in CPL on the 300?

I'd like to see some shots or get your opinion on the exp.

And... has anyone noticed enhanced issues with shadows, banding or noise in PP with PS or LR with the CPL.

Thank you,

TV

http://mediamaze.tumblr.com/

http://www.pixoto.com/filcro.mediastaffing

Has anyone shot water sports using the canon 52mm drop in CPL with a 300 or 400mm lens?

Can you tell me your feelings?

Can you post a few shots?

I thinking of using on to shoot kitesurfing.

Thank you,

TV

tvstaff wrote:

tvstaff wrote:

I'm using a Canon f/2.8 300 IS USM II with a 1DX to shoot water sports and optimizing shots by reducing glare on backlit subjects, over bright water, with bright blue sky, "could be ideal".

Has anyone out there had experience with the Canon 52mm drop in CPL on the 300?

I'd like to see some shots or get your opinion on the exp.

And... has anyone noticed enhanced issues with shadows, banding or noise in PP with PS or LR with the CPL.

Thank you,

TV

Has anyone shot water sports using the canon 52mm drop in CPL with a 300 or 400mm lens?

Can you tell me your feelings?

Can you post a few shots?

I thinking of using on to shoot kitesurfing.

Thank you,

TV

Hi TV

I own the 300 f/2.8 L IS USM II but I don't own the 52 mm CPL - the only thing that come to my mind is that it consumes roughly 2 stops of light - sometimes that can be critical.

Other that that i really love the lens and the sharpness - a polarizing filter will probably lower the possible quality a bit - but not by much - since the 52 CPL is compare to the lens really cheap just buy it - what wait?  Your 1Dx plus the 300 f/2.8 L IS USM II cost roughly 60x the polarizing filter

And the 2nd use of the filter could be as an ND filter als well - that's the reason why I am intending to buy one in the next couple of months.

not much help but I have not used cpl with my 300 as it tends to oversaturate and can cause banding in flat skies... this was a while ago though and I have not revisited.

I see you shoot your water stuff in strong light so would think this is even more likely to happen for you.....

tvstaff wrote:

Has anyone shot water sports using the canon 52mm drop in CPL with a 300 or 400mm lens?

Can you tell me your feelings?

I had one in a 600f/4 I and did not like it. The loss of light was significant for what I was doing, and it really messed with the background highlights on water. Made them look like hundreds of little fuzzy snowflakes. It also did not seem to focus properly at longer distances. With that said I am of the opinion the one I had was not functioning properly (or I was not functioning properly), because I could not take a shot I liked with it in the lens.

The CPL that you can spin with the external thumb wheel is a very cool looking piece though. You may have better luck with one on the 300f/2.8 II.

Additional useless information: I inadvertently sold the CPL drop in filter in a 500f/4. I forgot it was in there. Oddly, the guy that bought my 500f/4 called me about 8 months after buying the lens to ask if I would trade him for a standard gel filter that comes in all the lenses that have the 52mm drop in filter arrangement. I never got back to him.

Can you post a few shots?

Tossed most of them. This one shows the fuzzy snow flake effect on the background highlights. Maybe that is cool. I just don't care for it.

I thinking of using on to shoot kitesurfing.

Thank you,

TV

Schwany wrote:

tvstaff wrote:

Has anyone shot water sports using the canon 52mm drop in CPL with a 300 or 400mm lens?

Can you tell me your feelings?

I had one in a 600f/4 I and did not like it. The loss of light was significant for what I was doing, and it really messed with the background highlights on water. Made them look like hundreds of little fuzzy snowflakes. It also did not seem to focus properly at longer distances. With that said I am of the opinion the one I had was not functioning properly (or I was not functioning properly), because I could not take a shot I liked with it in the lens.

The CPL that you can spin with the external thumb wheel is a very cool looking piece though. You may have better luck with one on the 300f/2.8 II.

Additional useless information: I inadvertently sold the CPL drop in filter in a 500f/4. I forgot it was in there. Oddly, the guy that bought my 500f/4 called me about 8 months after buying the lens to ask if I would trade him for a standard gel filter that comes in all the lenses that have the 52mm drop in filter arrangement. I never got back to him.

Can you post a few shots?

Tossed most of them. This one shows the fuzzy snow flake effect on the background highlights. Maybe that is cool. I just don't care for it.

I thinking of using on to shoot kitesurfing.

Thank you,

TV

BINGO! Got my answer and a bird with snowflakes to prove it! <ROFL>

THANKS Schwany!  This place would be so lacking without your references, acumen and honesty!!!

Best regards,

Tony