G7 Polarizer?

[Abana]

......on the camera all the time, won't that wreck the portability
of the camera???

For some it might. But there are compact cases that acommodate the G7 with the adapter on.

I myself consider the G7 to be 2 cameras. When I'm just running around, working, whatever, I keep the camera in a soft padded (quick access) flip open case (LowePro D-Pods 50) without adapter to catch those quick shots.

When I am out expressly for the purpose of shooting, I have a larger case that will acommodate G7 (adaptor & filter on), filters, zoom lense and other accessories.

For me, that is the beauty of the G7. A great point and shoot, but can also be very DSLR-like when desired.

Abana

 

[Abana]

So, just to clarify, I can buy a linear polarizer for my Cokin P
series system and be OK? Is image quality the same between the two?

Image quality depends on the quality of the individual filter, not
on whether it's a LP or CP.

Is anything lost in the fact that the linear cannot be rotated?

It can be rotated! It's necessary that a polarizer rotate, to match
the scene you are seeing.

If not, then this suggests that the linear polarizer is not only
cheaper, but easier to use, as the implication might be that one
must 'fiddle' with the adjustment on the CP, while the LP just does
its job?

You use both exactly in the same way.

Ah, I see now. My mistake was in believing that the term 'linear' suggested stationary. Thanks.

Abana

Thanks,
Abana

--
bdery

Québec city, Canada
C A N O N S 2
C O O L P I X S Q
http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n13/bdery/

 

[Savas Kyprianides]

Agreed. Why have a nice lens with crappy glass in front of it?

I will be using the polarizer normally used on my 50mm DSLR lens. Now if they only had a lens hood to fit ...
--
Unapologetic 5D / G7 fanboy and zealot

 

[Spadetown]

A DSLR needs, however, both oscillation types (vertical and
horizontal) to work properly. So a circular polarizer is a linear
plus a device that splits half the light (say, the vertical one)
into vertical and horizontal. That way, you've cut the reflections,
and you still have both oscillation orientations.

That's all.

Good explaination bdery.

For more info on polarizers, the differences between circular and linear, and how to use them follow this link:

http://dpfwiw.com/polarizer.htm

Bottom line - if a camera doesn't use a beamsplitter you don't require a circular polarizer. Wish the guys in my local branch of Jessops would stop telling Joe Public that all AF cameras need circular polarizers )

 

[Wayne Larmon]

Agreed. Why have a nice lens with crappy glass in front of it?

B+W MRC is worth it, IMO, because they are much easier to clean than Hoyas. I even have a B+W MRC UV filter for my 18-55 DSLR kit lens.

I will be using the polarizer normally used on my 50mm DSLR lens.
Now if they only had a lens hood to fit ...

Yes. This is a sore point. Around the same time I got my G7, my wife got a Sony H5. The adapter tube and a hood came with the camera. The hood mounts on the adapter tube the same way that DSLR lens hoods mount. Why couldn't Canon do the same thing?

Wayne

 

[drMichael]

Just my thoughts. I guesss you can't have it all. At that point, might as well take your DSLR.

 

[drMichael]

It does look kind of cool, but at that point go get the Oly 550! It is also 28mm, BUT...no filter capability. So the G7 looks good with the adaptor, will take a polarizer, but only 35mm widest angle. I'm torn.

 

[drMichael]

Very succinct, correct, well-done answer. That should put that question to rest!

 

[drMichael]

I agree, but why not just get an entry DSLR like the D80 for the second camera?

 

[mamallama]

Agreed. Why have a nice lens with crappy glass in front of it?

B+W MRC is worth it, IMO, because they are much easier to clean
than Hoyas. I even have a B+W MRC UV filter for my 18-55 DSLR kit
lens.

I will be using the polarizer normally used on my 50mm DSLR lens.
Now if they only had a lens hood to fit ...

Yes. This is a sore point. Around the same time I got my G7, my
wife got a Sony H5. The adapter tube and a hood came with the
camera. The hood mounts on the adapter tube the same way that
DSLR lens hoods mount. Why couldn't Canon do the same thing?

Yes, that Sony H5 combination adapter and hood is quite innovative. The hood even fits on backwards for compact storage. Best yet it comes with the camera. I view Sony to be typical Japanese, like Toyota and Honda, when it comes to the fine details. I know Canon is Japanese too, but their attention to detail seems so American, like General Motors.

--mamallama

 

[bill hansen]

.....will also take a WA lens adapter. Canon makes one which will take you back to 26mm. Raynox makes one which will take you back to about 18mm, which is almost wide enough for anything. You'd take some hit in IQ (I have no idea how much), but the camera certainly offers flexibility.

If you carry the camera in a pocket and the lens adapters in another, you'd still have a very portable system, lighter and smaller than a DSLR. To me, noise and the "short end" of the native lens are the second and third biggest issues with the G7 - after lack of RAW of course.

I want it all! And I want it all now!

Bill

 

[bill hansen]

.....is already available. The brand name is "hand". Carefully used, it's really quite good. I don't think you can buy one on eBay though.

 

[MikeAusA200]

Wrong. You probably read that in an outdated article* (Steve
Digicam, I believe). Circular polarizer is ONLY needed in dSLRs and
SLRs that have a reflective mirror. Otherwise get linear and save
some money.

There's lots outdated stuff and misinformation floating around the
internet. Beware.

. . . and not even all DSLRs need Circular Polarisers. The Autofocus and Exposure works fine on my K10D using a Linear Polariser.

I think the main reason salesmen warn against Linear Polarisers is because they can make more profit on Circular Polarisers.

--
Mike . Sydney, Australia
http://www.pbase.com/mikeaus/galleries
http://s23.photobucket.com/albums/b356/MikeAus/?