| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/23/2010 07:48:19 PM · #26 |
WOW 123$
:( Maybe I can swallow it knowing that I will be able to use it alot later on.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2010 09:04:50 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
Just to clarify, they are required for the autofocusing function right?
I still think it would be cool to have a variable ND filter using 2 polarizers. I have 2 of them, both linear, I may mount it and try it out this weekend.
Originally posted by scalvert:
Circular polarizers are required for DSLRs.
|
|
Yes, you should try it out. You probably will be limited to manual focus, however for landscape work that's really no problem. |
|
|
|
06/23/2010 09:05:32 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by mbrutus2009:
WOW 123$
:( Maybe I can swallow it knowing that I will be able to use it alot later on. |
LOL, that's what I said... but do visit the 2filter site I linked in my edit, you can get the 52mm for $48-something. |
|
|
|
06/23/2010 09:31:12 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
The "3.0" refers a measure called optical density, which is really confusing. |
AFAIK (from graphic arts/printing work), "optical density" refers to a logarithmic scale of the percentage of light transmitted. 3.0 would mean 1 over 10 to the third or 0.001 (1/10th of 1%) of the light is getting through. The high-density film I work with has a density between 3.8 and 4.2 -- I was told by an astroneomer that a density of 4.0 was enough of a safety factor to use to view/photograph a solar eclipse ... |
|
|
|
06/23/2010 11:01:12 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Circular polarizers are required for DSLRs. |
Originally posted by PGerst:
Just to clarify, they are required for the autofocusing function right? |
It's for autofocus AND metering. DSLRs are not designed to handle linearly polarized light. As the incoming light is split internally, a linear polarizer hitting at the right angle could block ALL the light from your camera.
Message edited by author 2010-06-23 23:01:26. |
|
|
|
06/23/2010 11:05:06 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by mbrutus2009:
Filter
Would this be a good buy? |
You can stack two of those and still be under $50. Most of my waterfall shots are taken with a 0.6 ND filter and polarizer, so you'd be way ahead of me.
 |
|
|
|
06/23/2010 11:09:19 PM · #32 |
Would that be evident through the viewfinder or sensor? I imagine, only sensor.
Originally posted by scalvert:
It's for autofocus AND metering. DSLRs are not designed to handle linearly polarized light. As the incoming light is split internally, a linear polarizer hitting at the right angle could block ALL the light from your camera. |
|
|
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: 11/09/2025 08:56:55 AM EST.
