polariser, one size fits all

[geert_de_keyser1]

a few questions about polarisers, i'm thinking of buying one but not sure which

way to go, any help is welcome.

 

what is the difference between a linear and circular polariser? what kind do you

guys use on your LF cameras? pros and cons? one polariser for each filter size

or the lee polariser that fits all filter sizes by means of different sized lens

rings? does anyone have any experience with this Lee polariser? in what cases do

you guys believe not to go without a polariser? can the polariser be replaced by

some photoshop work?

[allan_schoening]

Circular Polarizer are made for Auto-Focus cameras. The construction of them allows you

to use the auto-focus. I like using the B+W filters...they are of very high quality. Lee

filters are very good too. As well, Hoya filters are excellent...but I still think B+W are the

best.

 

It's hard to say when not to go with a polarizer. It's a creative decision. I guess the only

time you can't use them is when the sun is in-front or behind you...they won't do anything

except give you a little neutral density. My favorite time to use polarizing filters is with

black and white. I use both a polarizer and a yellow. This gives me deep blacks in the sky

(Like a red 25) but still holds detail in the mid-tones (unlike the red-25).

 

I guess pretty much anything can be replaced with photoshop. Remember, almost every

tool and technique in photoshop is a derivative of real photographic techniques. Un-sharp

masks, masking, screens, overlays, etc. they were created in traditional photography first.

But why would you go through all that effort in photoshop when it only takes a few

seconds (and is a lot more fun) while shooting.

[nathan_ross]

I have a Lee filter system with a B&W circular polariser.

 

The circular polariser also has the advantage of letting you choose how intense your polarising is. E.g. in bright blue skies, you might want some extra saturation, but not the deep unrealistic blue you can get with full polarising. I also use it for black & white, as described above. I can get deeper skies, etc. but without losing details in other elements. I also use the polariser to remove (at least partially) reflections in windows.

 

The Lee filter system is, for me, exactly what I need, and the B&W filter fits on to it perfectly and suits all of my uses just fine. The only problem, of course, is that it's expensive gear.

[pico_digoliardi]

<i>The circular polariser also has the advantage of letting you choose how intense your polarising is.</i><p>

 

How does that work? I only use regular polarizers. I can dial-in as much as I want. The degree is, of course, dependent upon the polarized light.<p>

 

So, how is a circular different?

[ronald_moravec1]

Linear and circular do exactly the same thing.

 

Circ`s were invented to allow the same amount of light thru semisilvered slr mirror areas reguardless of rotational position when the meter cell is below the mirror.

 

A linear will stop or restrict light to the meter cell behind semisilvered mirrors at certain angles of rotation. You can still use one for ttl metering if you adjust the filter to get minimum exposure first, then do the meter reading, then rotate the pola to the degree you want. Circ`s are much easier as they have no effect on metering except to cause an exposure increase.

 

Can`t speak for auto focus cameras. The above was the original intent.

[ronald_moravec1]

My local guy tried to sell me a $200 circular for my view camera. I just laughed and bought a $20 linear as it does the same thing.

[leonard_evens]

As far as your camera is concerned, a linear polarizer should suffice. The only reason for a large format photographer to get a circular polarizer is if he/she is going to use a spotmeter with a mirror and is going to try to estimate exposure by reading through the filter.

[leonard_evens]

As far as your camera is concerned, a linear polarizer should suffice. The only reason for a large format photographer to get a circular polarizer is if he/she is going to use a spotmeter with a mirror and is going to try to estimate exposure by reading through the filter.

 

You can get a polarizing filter for the lens with the largest filter size that you have and use reducing rings for smaller filter size lenses.

[ken_schroeder]

Using the filter size for your largest lens and then using step up rings for the rest is very solid traditional wisdom. Most of us also have some 35mm or medium format gear, including filters. In my case, over the years I have acquired a standard kit of 52mm filters for my 35mm lenses. If you have a lens in the 135 to 180 range, most of them will use filters you might have for a 35mm camera. You could learn a lot by using a filter sized for a 35mm camera and a small 4x5 lens for very little cost. Then you could add the larger polarizer with your decision based on a solid knowledge base.

 

For my own work, my four lens kit (105, 135, 200 and 300) all uses 52mm filters. The 105 requires a step up ring from from 46. It works for me, however, I use the 200 and 135 almost all the time. Most people require wider angle lenses. Even with the largest size and rings, if you already have them, using the most used filters in your smallest size can be convenient and takes very little space.

[geert_de_keyser1]

thx for all the advice, i think i will be going for the Lee polariser (rotating linear 105mm diameter), i take it that one can see the changes on the ground glass? how do you guys compensate for exposure with a polariser on a LF camera?

[mag_miksch]

Geert, polarizers work also as grey filters, you loose around two stops, but its different from brand to brand, so its the best to meter your filter with a spotmeter.<br>

This loss is allways the same, independent of the amount of the polarizing effect,<br>

On your ground glass you see tne effect from a linear as good as from a circular.<br>

Used with wide angel lenses polas tend to produce vignetting, in 35mm format you can use a 28mm lens with a standard filter, for using a 24mm lens you need a slim polarizer,<p>

Martin