Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Video and Photography

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    Barry Waste (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       12-16-2009, 3:27 PM Reply   
I'm in need of a 77mm polarizing filter for a 70-200 2.8 and a 28-70 2.8..I want to be able to swap it between lenses instead of buying two.There's a fairly large price gap between low end and high end filters. Are the 200.00 filters worth twice as much as the 100.00 filters as far as IQ?
Old    Peter_C (peter_c)      Join Date: Sep 2001       12-16-2009, 7:48 PM Reply   
Dunno, but all my filters are B+W and did not cost $200.

Are the lenses different sizes in the threads? It is pretty much impossible to utilize a hood with an oversize filter and an adapter.
Old    Ryan Taylor (wakesurf12)      Join Date: Jun 2003       12-16-2009, 9:09 PM Reply   
The more expensive filters are worth the price. Why put a less than antiquate piece of glass over a $1000+ lens.

Good glass is where it's at.
Old    Barry Waste (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       12-16-2009, 9:29 PM Reply   
Peter, both lenses are threaded 77mm, so a single 77mm will fit both like a UV/protective filter. A hood will not be an issue on either one.

Ryan, I guess that is my question; are the 100.00 filters less than "antiquate"(adequate...?).
Old    Ryan Taylor (wakesurf12)      Join Date: Jun 2003       12-16-2009, 10:22 PM Reply   
Which ones are you looking at? I am rocking B+W's on my lenses. But just UV's. I am sure the Pol's cost more.
Old    Barry Waste (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       12-16-2009, 10:57 PM Reply   
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606825-REG/Canon_2191B001_2191B001_77mm_Circular_Polarizing.h tml
Vs.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/9760-REG/B_W_65_062162_77mm_Circular_Polarizer_Glass.html

Is the Canon twice and good as the B&W? What price point do you hit before you run into diminishing returns? Which is the best bang for the buck? Not necessarily just between those two.. I just used those two as an example because of their similarity and price spread.

(Message edited by barry on December 16, 2009)
Old    Barry Waste (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       12-16-2009, 11:03 PM Reply   
Basically, I want to purchase one good quality filter, but I don't want to waste my money by over purchasing.
Old    Peter_C (peter_c)      Join Date: Sep 2001       12-16-2009, 11:39 PM Reply   
I would guess you are paying for the Canon name with no real difference from a B+W. I would stay away from the cheapo's though like Tiffen and Hoya's low line.

These are the ones I have in a couple of sizes. I ebayed one and got another from I believe Adorama.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/181590-REG/B_W_66025844_77mm_Kaeseman_Circular_Polarizing.htm l
Old    Rich Dykmans (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       12-17-2009, 5:23 AM Reply   
You're paying for the anti reflective coatings on the better filters like the Hoya SMC's and B&Ws, in Canon's case you're paying for the logo. That's a good price on that B&W btw. For a 1 filter solution the circ pol is the last filter I'd buy however, way too specialized to stay on any lens all the time. I use UVs for front protection, NDs for video and ND grads for landscapes.
Old    Peter_C (peter_c)      Join Date: Sep 2001       12-17-2009, 9:08 AM Reply   
What I read on Nikonian's by some prominent photogs was that UV filters are useless on a digital camera, because it was a sensitivity to the film that created the need, where as a digi sensor is not affected by the UV. Of course many of them suggested insurance and no frontal protection. I use a B+W clear with coating to protect the front of two of my lenses, no UV protection.

Anyone got any thoughts on this issue?
Old    Rich Dykmans (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       12-17-2009, 10:00 AM Reply   
The problem with cheap UVs (when used for protection only) is they can sometimes cause reflections hence the recommendation for the Hoyas I spoke about above. I try to avoid them as well but if I'm carrying the camera in my coat skiing or in a pack it's cheap insurance. I agree that they're useless as far as improving the image.
Old    Barry Waste (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       12-17-2009, 2:37 PM Reply   
Thank you for the advice, guys. Good to know about the coatings/reflection on the UV's.

Rich, I'm not looking for the filter for protection, or to leave on.. just to knock down some haze/reflection on sunny days and I'd like to be able to use it on both lenses when necessary.
I have a Cokin holder for grads, etc.

(Message edited by barry on December 17, 2009)
Old    Rich Dykmans (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       12-17-2009, 5:02 PM Reply   
You lose a stop with polarizers, use an nd .3 or a contrast enhancing type filter.
Old    Barry Waste (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       12-17-2009, 8:28 PM Reply   
Will the ND knock the haze/reflection down?

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:46 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2012 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us