New Circular Polariser for Nikon 16-35mm on Nikon D810

[DavidUK]

Hello all, had my first real outing today with my new Nikon 16-35mm - I must say it's a great lens, very happy with it indeed

With my D200 I used a Sigma 10-20mm for landscaping and my Hoya Circular Polariser was never far away. As luck would have it (or so I thought) it's the same filter size as the 16-35mm so I popped it on and off I went. I soon found out that at the wider end a degree of vignetting was clearly visible - the filter isn't a slim line one and compared to a Hoya Pro 1 I bought last year for another lens it's quite chunky. First thought was to replace it with the Hoya Pro 1 equivalent but after a quick browse on their website I saw the Hoya HD range. I'm wondering if these are of a higher quality and whether I should choose one over the Pro 1 version... any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

 

[Thegreatroberto]

Unlikely to be anything to do with what filter you use. At the 16mm end, the light is in effect coming in side on to the filter, and effectively passing through a much "thicker" section. And the polarising effect is much more, hence the extra darkening. Crap description, but is due to the extra effect at the wise end. And because at 16mm you get a lot of sky, the polarising effect is not the same. ( it works best at 90 degrees to the sun).
In short polarising filters an WA lenses don't really work. Sorry.

 

[HoppyUK]

Unlikely to be anything to do with what filter you use. At the 16mm end, the light is in effect coming in side on to the filter, and effectively passing through a much "thicker" section. And the polarising effect is much more, hence the extra darkening. Crap description, but is due to the extra effect at the wise end. And because at 16mm you get a lot of sky, the polarising effect is not the same. ( it works best at 90 degrees to the sun).
In short polarising filters an WA lenses don't really work. Sorry.

The darkening effect your refer to only applies to very strong ND filters when a small increase in effective thickness of the glass translates to a noticeable increase in density. Doesn't apply to polarisers. It's almost certainly 'mechanical' vignetting where the lens is 'seeing' the rim of the filter at the wide-angle end. A slimline filter should fix it and yes, Hoya HD is top of the range.

Sometimes polarisers have to be used with care on ultra-wides but you don't always get a problem with uneven darkening of skies. It's most common when the sun is low but even then it can look okay and it can be moderated with rotation. To say polarisers "don't really work" with wide-angles is untrue and misleading.

 

[a1ex2001]

If you want a cheaper filter option marumi's cpl's review very well and I can't fault mine.

 

[DavidUK]

The darkening effect your refer to only applies to very strong ND filters when a small increase in effective thickness of the glass translates to a noticeable increase in density. Doesn't apply to polarisers. It's almost certainly 'mechanical' vignetting where the lens is 'seeing' the rim of the filter at the wide-angle end. A slimline filter should fix it and yes, Hoya HD is top of the range.

Sometimes polarisers have to be used with care on ultra-wides but you don't always get a problem with uneven darkening of skies. It's most common when the sun is low but even then it can look okay and it can be moderated with rotation. To say polarisers "don't really work" with wide-angles is untrue and misleading.

Thanks HoppyUK

I must admit, with the existing filter the negative effects were certainly more noticeable at the very widest end but could be lessened mid focal-length to not look too bad. I'm tempted to check out the Hoya HD filter but have also seen one or two (as a1ex2001 mentions) people suggesting Marumi filters are worth a look.

 

[Alejandro]

Thanks HoppyUK

I must admit, with the existing filter the negative effects were certainly more noticeable at the very widest end but could be lessened mid focal-length to not look too bad. I'm tempted to check out the Hoya HD filter but have also seen one or two (as a1ex2001 mentions) people suggesting Marumi filters are worth a look.

Another Marumi CPL user here. I've had no problems with it on my 24-120mm at 24mm. Went for it as it had good reviews and was a bit cheaper as I wasn't expecting to use it much.

Try not to get sea water on it though. Took me months to get it clean again ...

 

[DavidUK]

Another Marumi CPL user here. I've had no problems with it on my 24-120mm at 24mm. Went for it as it had good reviews and was a bit cheaper as I wasn't expecting to use it much.

Try not to get sea water on it though. Took me months to get it clean again ...

Thanks Alejandro, I may well take a look... I did look on Wex but they don't seem to sell the Marumi CPL. May add it to my Christmas wish list!

 

[HoppyUK]

Thanks HoppyUK

I must admit, with the existing filter the negative effects were certainly more noticeable at the very widest end but could be lessened mid focal-length to not look too bad. I'm tempted to check out the Hoya HD filter but have also seen one or two (as a1ex2001 mentions) people suggesting Marumi filters are worth a look.

Marumi are excellent too. Their Super DHG has very good easy-clean multicoating; Hoya Revo is similar. And the new Marumi Exus range is similar to Hoya HD in using a slightly lighter-toned polarising material, reducing overall density by about half a stop less - handy if you need to keep shutter speeds ups. Plus easy-clean coating

Edit: even rain water can stain the coating of regular filters if it's allowed to dry (eg Marumi DHG, Hoya Pro-1 etc). Sea water is very nasty stuff, but that too wipes off the best filters quite easily.

 

[rob-nikon]

I use a Hoya HD polariser, I've not tried it yet on the 16-35 so can't comment on the frame thickness, but it works well on the 70-200. The quality is very good but you are paying for it. I went with the hd polariser after using the hd protector filters that really are surprisingly clear but let's not get into protector/uv filters debate here.

 

[DavidUK]

I use a Hoya HD polariser, I've not tried it yet on the 16-35 so can't comment on the frame thickness, but it works well on the 70-200. The quality is very good but you are paying for it. I went with the hd polariser after using the hd protector filters that really are surprisingly clear but let's not get into protector/uv filters debate here.

Thanks Rob-Nikon. On the protector/uv subject briefly... I recently got a Hoya Pro 1 UV filter for the 16-35 from Amazon. I had to send it back as there was a clear scratch on the surface - like a small chip that reflected light in such a way that made me think it wasn't simply dirt. Amazon were great on the returns and I got a replacement (which was fine) a day or two later. Looking at the reviews on Amazon a few suggested they'd had similar issues. I know you should take things with a pinch of salt but made me think I must admit. I'd had numerous Hoya filters in the past and had no real problems.

 

[HoppyUK]

Thanks Rob-Nikon. On the protector/uv subject briefly... I recently got a Hoya Pro 1 UV filter for the 16-35 from Amazon. I had to send it back as there was a clear scratch on the surface - like a small chip that reflected light in such a way that made me think it wasn't simply dirt. Amazon were great on the returns and I got a replacement (which was fine) a day or two later. Looking at the reviews on Amazon a few suggested they'd had similar issues. I know you should take things with a pinch of salt but made me think I must admit. I'd had numerous Hoya filters in the past and had no real problems.

That 'scratch' sounds like a dried water mark - that's exactly what they look like, silvery. I don't think they do any harm and can be hard to remove from filters that don't have that extra protective layer of the best filters. You have to breathe on them quite a lot, and rub hard with a microfiber cloth. Cleaning fluids often won't shift them.

 

[DavidUK]

That 'scratch' sounds like a dried water mark - that's exactly what they look like, silvery. I don't think they do any harm and can be hard to remove from filters that don't have that extra protective layer of the best filters. You have to breathe on them quite a lot, and rub hard with a microfiber cloth. Cleaning fluids often won't shift them.

It was a little odd - the packaging wasn't damaged and the seals intact on the plastic case. I did try and clean it with a microfibre cloth but even with a degree of pressure that felt uncomfortable (ie I didn't want to break it) the mark wouldn't shift. Does bring me onto how we should clean such filters, I checked out one of my DX lenses with a filter and it was very dirty indeed! any pointers on how to clean them effectively?

 

[HoppyUK]

It was a little odd - the packaging wasn't damaged and the seals intact on the plastic case. I did try and clean it with a microfibre cloth but even with a degree of pressure that felt uncomfortable (ie I didn't want to break it) the mark wouldn't shift. Does bring me onto how we should clean such filters, I checked out one of my DX lenses with a filter and it was very dirty indeed! any pointers on how to clean them effectively?

Fine brush to remove dust etc, then microfiber cloth and some heavy breathing is all I use mostly - for lenses too. Finger marks are greasy and a cloth sometimes just smears them - use lens cleaning fluid for that, just a tiny drop. Don't be afraid to rub hard, coatings are tough and actually quite hard to scratch.

 

[DavidUK]

Fine brush to remove dust etc, then microfiber cloth and some heavy breathing is all I use mostly - for lenses too. Finger marks are greasy and a cloth sometimes just smears them - use lens cleaning fluid for that, just a tiny drop. Don't be afraid to rub hard, coatings are tough and actually quite hard to scratch.

I'm a big fan of the microfibre I must admit, I generally always carry a rocket blower too but need to replenish my lens cleaning fluid as it's many years old and pretty much gone. I did have a "lens pen" too but was always a tad warey - much prefer the blower.