Canon 50mm f/1.8 - Polariser or nothing?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by M@lew, Oct 9, 2007.

  1. macrumors 68000

    M@lew

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #1
    Tomorrow I think I'm going to go out with just my 400D and 50mm f/1.8 and I'm wondering if I should keep a polariser on or nothing. I'm going to be shooting street so I may need the extra light but you never know when getting rid of reflections may come in handy. Or I could just go nothing to get the light but no protection.

    The reason I'm not using my UV filter is because it produces too much "green flare" when I shoot into the light. I don't know if this is due to it being dirty or just because it's a UV filter but I'm going to give it a rest tomorrow.

    So would you leave a polariser on if you're going to be shooting during the day just to see the effects? Or would you rather just have nothing?
     
  2. macrumors 68040

    gwuMACaddict

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    washington dc
    #2
    What about a Haze filter or a plain glass filter?

    I just get nervous carrying around lenses without filters... Easier to replace a filter than a lens should something scratch it.
     
  3. macrumors 68040

    Grimace

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    with Hamburglar.
    #3
    depends! :p a have a polarizer that is 3x the price of a 50mm f/1.8!!!

    polarizers eat up a ton of light so you'll have to shoot 1.5-2 stops further open. Your colors will be very saturated depending on the angle to the sun. I see no harm in it -- experiment and show us the results!
     
  4. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Location:
    Southern California
    #4
    I use polarizers when I want a rich, saturated look in bright daylight

    be careful, and you won't have any problems with just the lens, I shoot that way all the time if I don't require a specific filter at the moment

    that's like a $110 lens, no? don't sweat it
     
  5. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    #5
    No Filters!

    Unless you have a specific use for the polarizer, don't use filters! Filters (like UV, haze etc) are the fastest way to reduce sharpness.
     
  6. macrumors 68040

    Grimace

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    with Hamburglar.
    #6
    It's a $75 lens (but a tremendous value!)

    I would argue against the notion that filters reduce sharpness but that also opens up a whole new can of worms.
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    adrianblaine

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Location:
    Pasadena, CA
    #7
    If it is really bright I would use the polarizer, especially if you are going to be shooting at f/1.8. The other day I was using the exact same lens and wanted to shoot a couple shots at 1.8 but parts of the picture were overexposed, even at 1/4000...
     
  8. macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #8
    Only put a filter on the lens if you need it. The Pol filter if not needed has the same effect as a neutral density filter and robs you of about 1.5 stops of light. If you do want the effect put it on. Take it off if you don't.

    Th very best "super multi coated" clear filters do not harm the image much but they cost $80 and air is both more clear and free.
     
  9. macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #9
    Filters do NOT reduce sharpness, unless they are very poor quality. They reduce contrast. Even the best filters do not transmit 100 of the light, some is reflected. It is the reflection from the side of the filter that faces your lens they you need to worry about. It adds a small amount of ghosting and flair.
    Key word here is "small" you may not care
     
  10. thread starter macrumors 68000

    M@lew

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #10
    Ah well I went shooting today. Didn't take THAT many pics. The polariser...I guess I didn't really notice it that much. Does make the lens stick out a bit so I'm wondering if I'd get some vignetting but it doesn't look like it so far. The only things memorable that happened today were:

    1) Almost broke the lens cap

    2) Bent the hot shoe on my 400D. Only noticed when I tried to put on my 430ex. Good thing I managed to bend it back with a screw driver. Had me scared for a bit though.

    So in conclusion:

    I've pretty much chosen to just keep the polariser on my 50mm for the moment and take it off if I need more light. I'll give my UV filter a good cleaning and see how it compares then as the sharpness didn't really impress me when it was on the other day. It was a pretty cheap HOYA filter so I don't know if that's a good thing/bad thing to put on my lens.

    Still going to save up for the Sigma f/1.4 and then the 50mm f/1.4 anyway as the focusing is just so much better. :D
     
  11. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Location:
    Southern California
    #11
    Did you trip over something?
     
  12. thread starter macrumors 68000

    M@lew

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #12
    Nah, I think it was the guy who sat in front of me on the bus squashed my bag. :mad:
     
  13. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    #13
    Only put a filter on the lens if you need it. The Pol filter if not needed has the same effect as a neutral density filter and robs you of about 1.5 stops of light. If you do want the effect put it on. Take it off if you don't.
     
  14. thread starter macrumors 68000

    M@lew

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #14
    I don't always have a place to store the filters though. This makes storing them when off pretty hard. In my big photo bag I do have a place, but in my small bag there's just no space. :(
     

Share This Page