Lee Landscape Polariser - Worth it?

Ruffmeister

Ruffmeister

Messages
1,204
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
No
Hi All,

Wondering wether to take the plunge and get a landscape polariser. Currently shoot long exposures / seascapes and landscapes.

Already had the 6, 10 and 15 stop filter along with some hard grads. Have read a lot of people rave about the polariser but have seen others say that they have felt somewhat underwhelmed by it.

Would you guys say it's definitely a worthwhile purchase? I've seen a few on here that don't use them. Curious to get some viewpoints. The idea of reducing glare and reflections at times sounds appealing.

Thanks,
 
For me, if I could have only one filter it would be the polariser. I use it mostly when I want to manage glare/reflections etc rather than the oft-quoted making the sky bluer ... it also increases saturation and has a slightly warming cast, which generally is a good thing imo for landscapes ... and you cannot replicate the effects of a cpl in post either.
 
What Paul says. Anybody that shoots landscapes should have a polariser in their bag. I have the Lee landscape filter and use it all the time mostly for removing glare and boosting saturation.
Whilst you can boost saturation and dehaze in post you will never be able to remove glare.
 
I invested in the Lee Landscape Polariser towards the back end of last year. When I used the D70 and D200 back in the day I seldom went anywhere without a polariser. I haven't got to grips with this one yet - I find it awkward to rotate it (as naturally the filter adapter also rotates!) but I'll get used to it with practice I imagine!
 
Rather than spending a fortune on the Lee version, why not just pick up a more realistically priced cheaper one to see if you find benefit in the shots you take first? I agree with those above though and have always had a polariser in the bag when shooting landscapes and architecture to remove glare.
 
stevelmx5 said:
Rather than spending a fortune on the Lee version, why not just pick up a more realistically priced cheaper one to see if you find benefit in the shots you take first? I agree with those above though and have always had a polariser in the bag when shooting landscapes and architecture to remove glare.
Click to expand...
A 105mm polariser isn't cheap wherever you get it from, and in fact the Lee Landscape version is one of the cheaper ones.

(Personally I love mine).
 
Stu Meech said:
A 105mm polariser isn't cheap wherever you get it from, and in fact the Lee Landscape version is one of the cheaper ones.

(Personally I love mine).
Click to expand...

Third of the price?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/111689182779

Just a suggestion really instead of paying £170 for a filter that the OP doesn't really know if they need one or not. I guess they could sell it on if they didn't get along with it.
 
Thanks for the input all - much appreciated. May look into that Haida one and see how I get on. Appreciate the link, Steve.

I know that if I went for the Lee one and didn't get on with it, the chances are I would get a good return back on it. I think for the kind of things I shoot then I would occasionally benefit from one. It's been something I've been contemplating for a while.

Seeing some before and after shots, there is definitely a positive difference.
 
stevelmx5 said:
Third of the price?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/111689182779

Just a suggestion really instead of paying £170 for a filter that the OP doesn't really know if they need one or not. I guess they could sell it on if they didn't get along with it.
Click to expand...
Fair enough - I just had a flick through some Google results. The one bonus of the Lee one is knowing it'll work with really wide lenses and no vignetting (up to 17mm), not sure what some of the others promise in that department.
 
Not sure what set up you have or lens you will use but if you purchase the 105 Lee polariser then you will need to factor in the ring adapter for the foundation kit as well which IIRC was about £35 and then you would be advised to get the uwa filter adapter and not the standard for the lens so to prevent any vignetting.
Also when using them on uwa lens you will need to be careful of rotating the filter too much and darkening the sky which will look unnatural.
I have had both 105mm Lee polarisers and the newer slimmer one is much warmer than the older one but no real problems when in pp. If price is an issue the Heliopan is also a good alternative make but I didn't like the fact you had to screw it on the lens each time to use. I can't comment on other makes as not used any.
 
Last edited:
taxboy said:
But if you go too wide there's always the risk of uneven polarisation . For the OP This affects all polarisers and is not manufacturer specific
Click to expand...
That only applies for the sky, it will not happen when used as the OP states :)
 
Just thought I would mention this here as it appears in some of the above posts -

Uneven polarisation is something to be wary of with wide-angles (especially super-wides) but it is really quite easy to deal with in PP.

What i find more difficult to deal with occurs when you use a polariser with a ND grad. A 1-stop is OK but two stops or more the blue of a sky tends to be toned down to a grey-ish blue.

Anyway, back to polarisers, I don't use a filter holder myself but would it be possible to use a standard polariser attached to your lens and then the filter holder on top of that? That way you wouldn't have fork out for an overpriced Lee 105mm filter.

I recommend this https://www.amazon.co.uk/Marumi-Super-Circular-Polarising-Filter/dp/B001F7BFNS but not the Exus which has a very fragile coating and is easily scratched.
 
Thanks for some of the input here.

I already have a UWA lens adapter for the filter holder which is used for a 17-40 L lens. Occasionally switch it to the 24-105 L too as they are the same filter thread. Im aware that I would need to factor in an adapter for the Lee kit.
I don't think you would be able to put a filter onto the lens thread with the Lee holder as the adapter makes use of this thread. Also I think it would feel a bit fiddly too if you could. Fair suggestion though.
The Nisi option looks interesting. Will take a look at that. I feel confident in knowing that the Lee option will be a good product and will suit two lenses I mention above that I have. I've been pretty impressed with the system so far - despite the cost.

It seems an interesting split of those that do and don't use them. I guess some of it comes down to taste and obviously the scenarios you are shooting in too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top