Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Digital photography and polarising filters?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 4:52:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give as
good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film, and
especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any possible problems with
artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?
A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to to
know if it's a good option before buying.
Thanks for any advice.
John Slevin
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 4:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

jslevin wrote:
> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully,
> the Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter
> give as good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm
> film, and especially using wide angle lenses?

Yes.

[]
> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like
> to to know if it's a good option before buying.

Heck, a 55mm CP filter cost me less than GBP 20!

David
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 4:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> wrote in
news:1117972364.33d33eb91c7dff19a2951f2f3a5a3dc9@teranews:

> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully,
> the Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give
> as good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film,
> and especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any possible
> problems with artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?
> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to
> to know if it's a good option before buying.
> Thanks for any advice.
> John Slevin
>
>

I use a polarising filter with my D70, great results.

What brand of filter are you looking at, at that price it must be a good
quality one. I have always wondered why people would invest hundreds or
even thousands of dollars in lenses only to scrimp on the quality of
filters, if its a good brand it will be worth every pence/cent.

Mick Brown
Related resources
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 4:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

jslevin wrote:
> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
> Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give as
> good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film, and
> especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any possible problems with
> artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?
> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to to
> know if it's a good option before buying.
> Thanks for any advice.
> John Slevin

Yes, it is worth using; I use one too, BUT 125 pounds!!! WOW -
should be a lot cheaper than that. Be sure, also, to check that it is
compatible... circular if you need that type for the Canon EF-S.






--

The News Guy(Mike) - Seinfeld Lists
http://wave.prohosting.com/tnguym

LOST Sawyer's Nicknames:
http://tinyurl.com/dp8nb
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 4:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Yes. I use them on the 27mm lens of my Oly 5060 and 28mm lense of my
Oly E-300 in doing some commerial swimming pool photography and they do
a good job cutting glare. They are also good with outdoor scenics,
though I am not sure they are quite as good as with film. But sill
worth using for many reasons. Expect some exposure cut. But that much
for a filter seems a bit off the wall.
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 4:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <1117972364.33d33eb91c7dff19a2951f2f3a5a3dc9@teranews>,
"jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> wrote:

> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
> Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give as
> good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film, and
> especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any possible problems with
> artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?
> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to to
> know if it's a good option before buying.
> Thanks for any advice.
> John Slevin

A circular polarizer helps just as much with digital. Problems with the
sky can happen. Certain conditions will result in a hole 90 degrees
from the sun. It happens with all lenses but it's more obvious at wide
angles.

You'll need a special wide angle polarizer for the 10-22mm.
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 7:15:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> wrote in message
news:1117972364.33d33eb91c7dff19a2951f2f3a5a3dc9@teranews...
>I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
>Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give as
> good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film, and
> especially using wide angle lenses?

Yes.

>Are there any possible problems with artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky'
>photos?
> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to to
> know if it's a good option before buying.

Jessops price for the Canon 77mm CP is £157 (!) , OTOH, a Jessops 77mm CP
(order code JESCP77) is a shade under 50 quid

HTH

Deep.
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 8:47:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I use a polarizer a lot with my E1 with a 14-45mm and a 11-22mm. The
only polariziers I ever tired are the Tamron ones. My last one cost me
$55 CDN for a 72mm. The camera store had a second brand but it was at
$135CDN, mind you the quality of it looked a bit better.

Here are a few shots using one.

http://www.evolver.ca/showoff/050601/050601_buildings1....

http://www.evolver.ca/showoff/050601/050601_building.jp...

http://www.myfourthirds.com/files/1117/3buildings_color...

http://www.myfourthirds.com/document.php?id=10640

jslevin wrote:
> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
> Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give as
> good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film, and
> especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any possible problems with
> artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?
> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to to
> know if it's a good option before buying.
> Thanks for any advice.
> John Slevin
>
>
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 9:52:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

jslevin wrote:
>I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
> Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter
> give as good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm
> film, and especially using wide angle lenses?

Exactly the same effect.

> Are there any possible
> problems with artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?
> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like
> to to know if it's a good option before buying.
> Thanks for any advice.
> John Slevin

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 10:48:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Future Assassin" <arek@lightspeed.ca> wrote in message
news:Z0Goe.1576615$Xk.803287@pd7tw3no...
>I use a polarizer a lot with my E1 with a 14-45mm and a 11-22mm. The only
>polariziers I ever tired are the Tamron ones. My last one cost me $55 CDN
>for a 72mm. The camera store had a second brand but it was at $135CDN, mind
>you the quality of it looked a bit better.
>
> Here are a few shots using one.
>
> http://www.evolver.ca/showoff/050601/050601_buildings1....
>
> http://www.evolver.ca/showoff/050601/050601_building.jp...
>
> http://www.myfourthirds.com/files/1117/3buildings_color...
>
> http://www.myfourthirds.com/document.php?id=10640
>

Excellent pictures. I love the colour saturation and deep blues. Clouds look
great too.
John.










> jslevin wrote:
>> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
>> Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
>> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give as
>> good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film, and
>> especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any possible problems with
>> artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?
>> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to to
>> know if it's a good option before buying.
>> Thanks for any advice.
>> John Slevin
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 11:46:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:mcmurtri-F7F96F.10540005062005@corp-radius.supernews.com...
> In article <1117972364.33d33eb91c7dff19a2951f2f3a5a3dc9@teranews>,
> "jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> wrote:
>
>> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
>> Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
>> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give as
>> good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film, and
>> especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any possible problems with
>> artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?
>> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to to
>> know if it's a good option before buying.
>> Thanks for any advice.
>> John Slevin
>
> A circular polarizer helps just as much with digital. Problems with the
> sky can happen. Certain conditions will result in a hole 90 degrees
> from the sun. It happens with all lenses but it's more obvious at wide
> angles.
>
> You'll need a special wide angle polarizer for the 10-22mm.



Will a 77mm Circular Polarizer Filter not do? What's a
wide-angle polarizer?
John.
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 12:04:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

jslevin wrote:
> "Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> news:mcmurtri-F7F96F.10540005062005@corp-radius.supernews.com...
>> In article <1117972364.33d33eb91c7dff19a2951f2f3a5a3dc9@teranews>,
>> "jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully,
>>> the Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
>>> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter
>>> give as good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm
>>> film, and especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any
>>> possible problems with artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky'
>>> photos? A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd
>>> like
>>> to to know if it's a good option before buying.
>>> Thanks for any advice.
>>> John Slevin
>>
>> A circular polarizer helps just as much with digital. Problems with
>> the sky can happen. Certain conditions will result in a hole 90
>> degrees from the sun. It happens with all lenses but it's more
>> obvious at wide angles.
>>
>> You'll need a special wide angle polarizer for the 10-22mm.
>
>
>
> Will a 77mm Circular Polarizer Filter not do? What's a
> wide-angle polarizer?

Wide angle lenses can't handle anything sticking very far in front of
the lens ring. They make special thin filters including polarizing filters
for wide angle lenses so they don't block part of the image. You likely
need one. Polarizing filters are usually thicker than standard filters
because they need to rotate.


> John.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 3:32:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> writes:

> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
> Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give as
> good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film, and
> especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any possible problems with
> artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?

Polarizers work fine with digital.

With wideangle lenses, they *work* fine in the engineering sense --
but in photos with wide swaths of sky, you will generally get a
*gradient* across the sky, which is mostly not what people want. The
polarization varies with the angle from the sun, and if you show
enough breadth of sky, that starts to show.

> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to to
> know if it's a good option before buying.

Decent polarizers are expensive, and go up *very* quickly with size.
That *sounds* high to me, but my instincts are for US$, so don't pay
too much attention.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 3:55:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <1117997183.aa41cf931a02a240c2a70ba0895f5e15@teranews>,
"jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> wrote:

> "Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> news:mcmurtri-F7F96F.10540005062005@corp-radius.supernews.com...
> > In article <1117972364.33d33eb91c7dff19a2951f2f3a5a3dc9@teranews>,
> > "jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and hopefully, the
> >> Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
> >> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter give as
> >> good a result with digital as it does with traditional 35mm film, and
> >> especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any possible problems with
> >> artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky' photos?
> >> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd like to to
> >> know if it's a good option before buying.
> >> Thanks for any advice.
> >> John Slevin
> >
> > A circular polarizer helps just as much with digital. Problems with the
> > sky can happen. Certain conditions will result in a hole 90 degrees
> > from the sun. It happens with all lenses but it's more obvious at wide
> > angles.
> >
> > You'll need a special wide angle polarizer for the 10-22mm.
>
>
>
> Will a 77mm Circular Polarizer Filter not do? What's a
> wide-angle polarizer?
> John.

A wide-angle polarizer is thinner and wider so that it doesn't block the
corners of the picture. The one downside is that you can't put a normal
lens cap on one.


| |
||-------------|| Normal
| |

\\-----------------// Wide-Angle
| |
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 8:24:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> In article <1117997183.aa41cf931a02a240c2a70ba0895f5e15@teranews>,
> "jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> wrote:
>
>> "Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
>> news:mcmurtri-F7F96F.10540005062005@corp-radius.supernews.com...
>>> In article <1117972364.33d33eb91c7dff19a2951f2f3a5a3dc9@teranews>,
>>> "jslevin" <greenforest@eircam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am at the point of deciding on a new Canon EOS 20D and
>>>> hopefully, the Canon EF-S 10-22 mm. f3.5 4.5 SLR lens.
>>>> Before I part with a big chunk of money, does a polarising filter
>>>> give as good a result with digital as it does with traditional
>>>> 35mm film, and especially using wide angle lenses? Are there any
>>>> possible problems with artifacts or large areas of 'blue sky'
>>>> photos?
>>>> A 77mm. filter is, I believe, around £125.00 in the UK and I'd
>>>> like to to know if it's a good option before buying.
>>>> Thanks for any advice.
>>>> John Slevin
>>>
>>> A circular polarizer helps just as much with digital. Problems
>>> with the sky can happen. Certain conditions will result in a hole
>>> 90 degrees from the sun. It happens with all lenses but it's more
>>> obvious at wide angles.
>>>
>>> You'll need a special wide angle polarizer for the 10-22mm.
>>
>>
>>
>> Will a 77mm Circular Polarizer Filter not do? What's
>> a
>> wide-angle polarizer?
>> John.
>
> A wide-angle polarizer is thinner and wider so that it doesn't block
> the corners of the picture. The one downside is that you can't put
> a
> normal lens cap on one.
>
>
>> |
> ||-------------|| Normal
> | |
>
> \\-----------------// Wide-Angle
> | |

Downside 1b is they are not easy to turn with a lens hood in place,
and easy to turn removing and replacing a lens hood.

--
Frank ess
!