Filters?

Carlo

Carlo

Messages
1,549
Name
Carl
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm in a bit of a quandry regarding filters, particulary polarising ones.
Way back, about 25 yrs ago, when i first got a film slr, i bought a polarising filter (hoya PL) and was hugely impressed with the results it gave.
It did everything polarisers claim to do, so when i finally bought a DSLR late last year i knew i'd have to buy one. (old one was 49mm fit!)
I now have 3 CPL filters for my lenses, first i bought a cheap Zeiss one, then a Hoya Pro 1 multi coated , and a Sigma DG EX wide band, both of which i bought second hand due to their high costs new.
To be brief, i'm hugely disappointed!
There is little or no difference (to my eyes anyway!) in the cheap £5 Zeiss, and the Hoya or Sigma (over £150 new!!!).
But more importantly, my old Hoya film filter ( i say this as digital wasn't around when i bought it!) is so much better than the others.
I';ve just bought a Sigma 10-20mm lens, and have bought a cheap UV filter, mainly for protection, but am now not willing to fork out £40+ on a 2nd hand branded CPL filter that in my opinion won't be up to standard!
Am i alone in this opinion, or am i missing something fairly obvious?
 
If you can't see the difference using a CPL I'd suggest that something is wrong somewhere. Either with the filters themselves, the use of them or possibly your digital workflow.

Does the old Hoya give the best results when used with your digtal camera compared to the others, or are you comparing film results to digital results?
 
I use a Hoya Pro CPL and it gives excellent results, and with the sun at approx 90 degrees you really do see the difference through the viewfinder.

I would not recommend that you use a CPL on your Sigma 10-20 unless you were after some special effect, as the lens is so wide that you would get a nice blue sky at one end and a more washed out sky the other end.
 
Alastair said:
If you can't see the difference using a CPL I'd suggest that something is wrong somewhere. Either with the filters themselves, the use of them or possibly your digital workflow.

Does the old Hoya give the best results when used with your digtal camera compared to the others, or are you comparing film results to digital results?
Click to expand...

i cant compare the old Hoya directly to the others as its a 49mm fit, where the others are 62, and 67mm.
All i can do is compare visually by looking through the camera's viewfinder.
The old Hoya seems to give far better contrast and colour saturation than all the newer ones.
I was wondering if the standard had dropped significantly in manufacture, or digital ones are made using different methods/coatings etc...
 
Last edited:
Nikon Fan said:
I use a Hoya Pro CPL and it gives excellent results, and with the sun at approx 90 degrees you really do see the difference through the viewfinder.

I would not recommend that you use a CPL on your Sigma 10-20 unless you were after some special effect, as the lens is so wide that you would get a nice blue sky at one end and a more washed out sky the other end.
Click to expand...


I've just read that too regarding CPL's on UWA lenses!
Kind of makes my post redundant!, or at least/best saves me wasting £50+ on a filter!
:)
 
I've lived through film and digital and used a wide range of qualities of polariser linear then circular. I've never been able to see any difference when looking through the viewfinder.
 
Point it at your computer screen and turn the filter... You will then see it work!
 
Agree with Tom on using the filter on the computer screen. The cheap one tend to not black everything when turning it. The good one will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top