Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Mar 16, 2013, 11:21 PM   #1
TheReef
macrumors 68000
 
TheReef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NSW, Australia.
Circular Polarisers - Image Quality Reduction

G'day crew,

I bought some standard Hoya CPL filters off eBay last year (not HD, Pro1 or Evo series), and have been less than impressed with them.

I'm thinking they may be fakes... from what I read Hoya filters are meant to go well.
Images I get from them are soft and un-contrasty, and I sometimes see double vision in out of focus areas... so bad I just don't use them at all.

My question is, am I expecting too much? I've attached some quick and dirty 100% crops as a comparison (unaltered RAW, same focus for both shots).

Without filter:


With filter:



I'm tempted to go for the "HD" line of Hoya CPL filters from B&H, they seem to get good reviews and just cop the high shipping costs to down under.

This would be the one I'm specifically interested in: B&H link.

Can anyone offer any input/suggestions here? B+W seem good as well but expensive.

Thanks in advance
__________________
Swing by my gallery - Photos by Reef

Last edited by TheReef; Mar 26, 2013 at 09:20 PM. Reason: First image seems to have disappeared...
TheReef is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2013, 12:43 AM   #2
Prodo123
macrumors 68020
 
Prodo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
If they're the standard $50 Hoyas, then I think you're expecting a little too much.
The HD and Pro1 series seem to have good reviews; try them out!
Also if your wallet can handle it the B+W filters are great.
__________________
MacBook Pro 15" 2.2Ghz hi-res glossy, 16GB RAM, Logitech G700, Das Keyboard, Seagate Momentus XT 750GB iPhone 5 White 32GB Audiophile Photographer, videographer, audio engineer
Prodo123 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2013, 03:29 AM   #3
ijohn.8.80
macrumors 65816
 
ijohn.8.80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Adelaide, Oztwaylya.
Just out of interest, what size (diameter) are they? I read somewhere that over 77mm they are useless.
__________________
YouTube is not the resurrection of Dada
ijohn.8.80 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2013, 04:36 AM   #4
Phrasikleia
macrumors 68040
 
Phrasikleia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Over there------->
Wow, that second example is incredibly bad. My CPLs are Hoya Pro 1 (some are "Super" Pro 1, and some are Pro 1 "Digital"). I've never had any problems with resolution. They do affect contrast a bit, but that's the nature of polarization. I purchased mine from Maxsaver.net, which sells Hoya and B&W at pretty good prices.
Phrasikleia is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2013, 05:21 AM   #5
isprocket
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Haven,CT.
I've been trying to learn more about filters as I've wanted to try one. Does anyone have any links to share.
I have only this one:

http://www.bestcovery.com/best-polarizer-filter
isprocket is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2013, 05:43 AM   #6
phrehdd
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
I may be incorrect but early on with digital cameras, it was made pretty clear to me to avoid circular polarizers (as opposed to film) and use the standard linear polarizers.

If someone knows different on this, please jump in.
phrehdd is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2013, 06:17 AM   #7
Phrasikleia
macrumors 68040
 
Phrasikleia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Over there------->
Quote:
Originally Posted by phrehdd View Post
I may be incorrect but early on with digital cameras, it was made pretty clear to me to avoid circular polarizers (as opposed to film) and use the standard linear polarizers.

If someone knows different on this, please jump in.
No, it's the other way around. Linear is for film, circular for digital.
Phrasikleia is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2013, 04:01 AM   #8
TheReef
Thread Starter
macrumors 68000
 
TheReef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NSW, Australia.
Thanks for the replies, much appreciated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ijohn.8.80 View Post
Just out of interest, what size (diameter) are they? I read somewhere that over 77mm they are useless.
That one was a 58mm CPL on a 55-300 zoom. Yeah they're not that great on wider angle lenses that typically use 77mm threads. Different areas of the sky become varying shades of blue. I believe this is due to the differing angles of light in such a wide FOV being effected by the polarisation.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrasikleia View Post
Wow, that second example is incredibly bad. My CPLs are Hoya Pro 1 (some are "Super" Pro 1, and some are Pro 1 "Digital"). I've never had any problems with resolution. They do affect contrast a bit, but that's the nature of polarization. I purchased mine from Maxsaver.net, which sells Hoya and B&W at pretty good prices.
Thanks P, I had a look over at Maxsaver.net, those look like pretty good prices. I found there's talk regarding the authenticity of some of their Hoya and B+W products... it should be ok but now I want to play it safe, so B&H it will probably be. The free shipping is very tempting vs B&H's $30 though...


After much reading today I thought I was set on the Hoya HD CPL, they are meant to be tougher, more scratch/smudge resistant and clean easier than regular filters, but then found reports of them physically falling apart.

The next best (value) I've found is the B+W Kaesemann CPL with the MRC coating, $105 @ B&H. It seems to offer a similar level of ease-of-cleaning as the Hoya HD with it's special coating. It is also more "sealed" against moisture, so I think that's what I'll go with unless anybody can convince me otherwise?
I'm specifically after the anti-flare/scratch/gunk coating.
__________________
Swing by my gallery - Photos by Reef
TheReef is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2013, 07:39 AM   #9
Photoshopper
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Can't go wrong with the B+W. More often than not, you get what you pay (or don't pay) for.
If IQ is at all important you can't scrimp on a layer of glass going in front of your lens.
__________________
My Zenfolio
Photoshopper is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2013, 10:12 AM   #10
jabbott
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by isprocket View Post
I've been trying to learn more about filters as I've wanted to try one. Does anyone have any links to share.
I have only this one:

http://www.bestcovery.com/best-polarizer-filter
Here is a really good review site for circular polarizers:
http://www.lenstip.com/115.1-article...ters_test.html
jabbott is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2013, 11:28 AM   #11
Photoshopper
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by isprocket View Post
I've been trying to learn more about filters as I've wanted to try one. Does anyone have any links to share.
I have only this one:

http://www.bestcovery.com/best-polarizer-filter
Here's a thread from an excellent comprehensive photo forum, POTN:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/....php?t=1024244
__________________
My Zenfolio
Photoshopper is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 24, 2013, 10:38 AM   #12
Cheese&Apple
macrumors Demi-God
 
Cheese&Apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Toronto
Wow, it's hard to believe that there are filters out there that can degrade image quality that much. This leaves me wondering what my mid-price range (mid-quality?) protective UV filters are doing. I'll have to set-up some shots to check for a difference.

There was a lively and interesting discussion in a thread on this topic sometime last year...I can't seem to find it but there were clearly two opposing points of view (both very polarized )

- One side of the discussion was that for one thin single layer of glass, quality really doesn't matter that much and you don't have to spend a lot.
- The other side of the discussion was of course the opposite. To prove the point with an exaggerated example, images were posted of someone shooting through about 50 stacked filters and the resulting loss of image quality.

Bottom line I think the image through the stacked filters was better than your single filtered shot.
Cheese&Apple is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 25, 2013, 08:15 AM   #13
OreoCookie
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Fukuoka, Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrasikleia View Post
No, it's the other way around. Linear is for film, circular for digital.
Are you sure? I seem to remember back in the film days that even then you were supposed to go for circular pol filters, because otherwise the AF won't work properly. I've never owned anything but circular pol filters, so I haven't tried the linear variety on either film or digital.
__________________
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
OreoCookie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 25, 2013, 12:06 PM   #14
Phrasikleia
macrumors 68040
 
Phrasikleia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Over there------->
Quote:
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Are you sure? I seem to remember back in the film days that even then you were supposed to go for circular pol filters, because otherwise the AF won't work properly. I've never owned anything but circular pol filters, so I haven't tried the linear variety on either film or digital.
I just checked the Wikipedia entry to be sure. Linear polarizers can interfere with auto-focus and anti-aliasing filters on DSLR sensors. So circular polarizers are preferable for digital cameras, but it sounds as though you could probably get away with using a linear one if you're manually focusing something like a Nikon D800E. But yeah, apparently you're correct about the later film SLRs with auto-focus: if you want to use a linear polarizer on one, you have to focus manually.

Bottom line: for digital cameras, a circular polarizer is best.
Phrasikleia is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2013, 12:51 AM   #15
OreoCookie
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Fukuoka, Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrasikleia View Post
So circular polarizers are preferable for digital cameras, but it sounds as though you could probably get away with using a linear one if you're manually focusing something like a Nikon D800E. But yeah, apparently you're correct about the later film SLRs with auto-focus: if you want to use a linear polarizer on one, you have to focus manually.
I didn't know there are additional problems between linear pol filters and the sensor, I just assumed they'd have the same issues as film cameras with AF. Thanks for the info.
__________________
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
OreoCookie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2013, 01:14 AM   #16
TheReef
Thread Starter
macrumors 68000
 
TheReef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NSW, Australia.
Many thanks for all the replies

I just ordered the B+W Kaesemann CPL with MRC from B&H.

I made the most of the order and filled up my cart with a x400 ND, fresh new Hitech ND/grads and some Portra 400 film ...it didn't increase the international shipping charges.


I'll report back with my results with the polariser.

Cheers.
__________________
Swing by my gallery - Photos by Reef
TheReef is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Monitor Image Quality Questions Traverse Mac Peripherals 5 Jan 29, 2014 06:27 PM
iMovie '11 serious image quality loss BleuPhoto Mac Applications and Mac App Store 4 Jun 3, 2013 03:39 PM
Spigen Glas.tR and Image Quality NightMoose iPhone Accessories 6 Dec 8, 2012 04:26 AM
iPhone 5 screen image quality Delorean2006 iPhone 5 Nov 3, 2012 06:28 PM
Apple tv image quality Purakane Apple TV and Home Theater 16 Oct 31, 2012 04:22 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC