| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/01/2005 04:50:43 PM · #1 |
|
|
|
05/01/2005 05:01:51 PM · #2 |
The Hoya filters are pretty good, but I would not buy the uncoated version. I'd go with the next one up, the HMC. The coating will help to reduce ghosting and flare. Those are the biggest image quality problems that can be brought on or made worse by the filter. ghosting in particular, where light reflects back toward the sensor off the back of the filter, can be a real problem, and is a good reason to use a multi-coated filter.
I had a Hoya HMC circular polarizer, and it was a pretty decent filter. I do like the B+W version I have now better, but that's about $200. The difference in the effect on image quality will be small.
You don't need a "thin" filter, since you are using the 17-40 on a 1.6-crop body and you'll never see the slight vignetting that might appear at the 17mm end - it will be outside your sensor area.
|
|
|
|
05/01/2005 05:02:14 PM · #3 |
| I don't think that I would use that one on my L lens. I would try this one //www.singh-ray.com/polarizers.html or B&W |
|
|
|
05/02/2005 07:55:49 AM · #4 |
I'm using a 'Slim' Sigma EX MC job on my 17-40.
I originally got it as Hoya HMC is not available in New Zealand any more, but I'm very happy with it at the two UV's I got at the same time.
I tested it out in some deliberately bad lighting conditions, such as having the sun in the corner of the frame, black objects backlit, flash bounced off glass, etc..
I found it didn't introduce any abberations or colour shift that was noticable, apart from the normal 'weird' effects with glass objects. In harsh contrast (Sun in the corner) it did add a slight extra flare, but it is not intrusive, and was actually smaller than the flare created by the Sigma EX MC UV filter.
The contrast shift in sky tones wasn't as large as I expected, but it certainly has the desired effect on landscapes (deeper blues, reduced dynamic range) with no colour shift.
All in all I can recommend the EX MC filters, although you'll find they are not cheap...
|
|
|
|
05/02/2005 12:48:01 PM · #5 |
for a lens that is top of the line, you want top of the line polarizer.
the best
good enough, the one I got |
|
|
|
05/02/2005 12:53:51 PM · #6 |
I use the same filter, it's two years old now, and, yes, it has proven to be 'good enough', as Dan says. ;-)
Message edited by author 2005-05-02 14:35:20.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2005 01:18:39 PM · #7 |
any thoughts on the canon line of polarizers?
|
|
|
|
05/02/2005 02:32:29 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by robgo:
any thoughts on the canon line of polarizers? |
the Canon line is designed for the budget lenses, and as such it´s too bad for L type quality ;) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/16/2025 10:36:34 AM EDT.
