What brand of Circular Polarising filter is best??

[joshuag]

I didn't buy it because the other filter was over 8-10 months old. It was because the other filter somehow fell off my lens during a shoot. Not sure why as I always turn the filter to lock it.

[joshuag]

So Kenko Pro aren't that great I'm gathering.

[Tannin]

My guess, Joshuag, is that they are perfectly OK. Probably rebadged Hoyas. A lot of Kenko stuff is. But I'm only guessing.

[arubaato]

My guess, Joshuag, is that they are perfectly OK. Probably rebadged Hoyas. A lot of Kenko stuff is. But I'm only guessing.

I'm told that both Hoya and Kenko are owned by Tokina, but Hoyas are made in Japan and Kenkos are made in Philipines or Vietnam.

[Tannin]

Other way around: Hoya own both Tokina and Pentax. And a little googling soon shows that Kenko is another part of the Hoya empire.

[GlennSan]

[*] Clear. Clear, skylight, and UV filters are purely for protection of the lens. Cheap ones do really horrible things to your image quality. Good ones only degrade quality a small amount - but all filters reduce picture quality to at least some extent. In general, it's not worth putting a clear filter on any lens worth less than ~$1000 - a good filter will cost you the best part of $200, so you'd be mad to put one on a $130 lens. For lenses over $1000, protection makes more economic sense, but do you really want to degrade the picture quality of that $1000 lens by putting a filter on it?
Cheapo filters can do really, really horrible things to your images. Avoid them like poison.

While I generally agree with your last sentence Tony, I cannot say I've been very successful in proving to myself that clear filters make any noticeable difference in image quality on my equipment for the typical usage patterns and output resolution that I use.

It's very possible that my limited testing thus far has not been detailed enough to tease out these differences just as it may be possible that my eyesight simply isn't good enough to discern the details. I don't really want to generate a debate on this specific issue but I remain curious as to how to test to show the differences in IQ in some realistic way.

What I know for a fact is that I have two young boys who are occasionally allowed to use my D100 while I am nearby and if I didn't have protection filters fitted, I'd be doing a lot of cleaning of front elements! YMMV.

[Tannin]

No argument from me there, Glennsan, not so far as cameras and kids go. I think there are really two key statements contained in my post, and I doubt thgat you will disagree with either one. (Or possibly they are contained in my head - whether they actually made it into my post or not is another question!)

1: Really nasty filters. If you've never observed any real difference in IQ, and you have at least done a casual AB comparison with and without, then I can 100% guarantee that you have never used the sort of filter I am talking about. You'd recognise the difference instantly if you start looking for it. Thankfully, it isn't that common. But you certainly see filters this bad around the place. They can be a little hard to wake up to if they are on a kit lens which is the only lens a beginning photographer owns. He doesn't know any different yet, and you glance at his work and just naturally assume he is a terrible photographer because all his shots are bad. It's only when you ask a few moire questions, start looking for what he needs to do better, scratch your head over why his pictures are always NQR, only then do you think to try taking the filter off and all becomes clear. I've met this a few times now. You will also see more experienced 'togs fall for the "I just bought an expensive new lens and it's no good" trick now and then. There are probably a few threads here somewhere to illustrate this. I've certainly seen it on DPR. Anyway, when you meet one of these, you will recognise it, nothing surer.

2: good quality filters. These have only a small effect on IQ. I have never really tried to spot it - I'm not much of a pixel peeper - but I recognise that every extra layer of glass reduces colour and contrast and adds potential for flare. I wouldn't expect to be able to see the difference without some very careful tests (except flare - flare shows up far more readily, especially if you are doing silly stuff like putting the sun in the frame), but I respect the theory and am happy to simply stipulate that there is some reduction in quality, however small.

[ausguitarman]

I just bought a couple of the Hoya HD CPL's .

I'm going on holidays in a few weeks so I'll let you know how they go.

[GlennSan]

Completely agree then Tony.

In my testing I could almost convince myself that there was some extra flaring on specular highlights when the sun wasn't in frame. I didn't do sun-in-frame tests but agree with your comments about extra elements always beings a Bad Thing (tm) when shooting into the sun. I should get my lazy butt out and do some testing along that line...

[Geoff Port]

Hey arthur king,
I was doing a bit of a search regarding the best type/brand of Polarising filters to purchase and came across this thread. Having a great deal of respect for your abilities with the camera and advice given across the forum may I ask you the question.
Without spending multiple hundreds of dollars, what is the best brand and type of PF to purchase. I'm prepared to go into the low $100 mark but can't justify any more.
At present my equipment is a 60D with a VERY cheap 18-55mm f/4.5-5.6 Canon kit lens. I will be upgrading the lens very soon as I think its giving me bad results at the wider angle end of the lens.

[arthurking83]

.....
Without spending multiple hundreds of dollars, what is the best brand and type of PF to purchase. I'm prepared to go into the low $100 mark but can't justify any more ......

Damned that reminded me!

Hoya's in the $70-100 range offer good value for money.

Be weary tho, many counterfeit Hoya's on ebay too .. so if you see a Pro1 uber duper top'o'th'range Hoya going too cheaply, maybe avoid it unless you can vouch for the ebayer!

Otherwise, from what I've read.... Marumi have a DHG model CPL. I've seen them for 77mm sizes at $86 over on DWI.
(that's what I just remembered I was supposed to get a long time ago!)

I've damned clean forgot which of the Hoyas you'd want to avoid now .. they come in various coloured packages, and I THINK the purple coloured packaging in about the minimum you'd want.
I have a purple, a green and one that came in a silvery grey package(the Pro1D came in an all black packaged case).
One of them continually fell apart on me and some greasy goop constantly contaminated the glass if I tried to clean it with a cloth. I think that one was the green pack version.(??)

Anyhow, whichever one it was, it was the cheapest version, and in the end I threw it out as it was so poorly made(the metal casing part).
The one I have now(which I'm sure is the purple packaged model) is the one that I use.
(those two are the 67mm sizes I use for those lenses).
The grey silver pack model is much nicer again(that one is 62mm for one specific lens).

The two 77mm filters I have are an old(very old!) linear polariser from 20 years ago .. and a very expensive ultra slim Pro1D. The Pro1D was a waste of money and has hardly seen much use.
Not cause it's bad... simply because it's less ergonomic to use due to the very slim rotating ring.
it's harder to rotate, but that's not really the issue, you get used to it I suppose, but the real problem is not being able to mount a lens cap onto it.
it comes out very occasionally.
I have two main lenses I use these 77mm polarisers on, and when I'm packing up to get to my next location, it's PITA to have to unmount it to protect it when I drive with the camera on the front seat.

So because of this, I've been looking to get another 77mm polariser but this time a normal sized one that allows me to cover it with a lens cap.

I got the ultra slim filter as I use polarisers and grads a lot with the Sigma 10-20mm, and didn't want vignetting to be an issue.
But as I subsequently found, there's no difference in vignetting at all between the standard sized Pol with stacked GNDs and the ultra slim version with the same amount of stacked grads.

Having said that tho, the quality of the fittings(not IQ of the images tho!!) just the quality of the metal rings of the Pro1D are superb when compared to any of the cheaper model Hoyas.
It's silky smooth to turn, even tho the rotating collar is only 1mm thin and its hard to see the white locating marks.

As for any difference in IQ .. none that I noticed. I suppose if you tested vigorously, there may be a difference, but apart from a difference in colour cast between them, there is no notable difference in IQ.
I don't have a normal sized Pro1D so I can't comment on the quality of that model range, but I suspect they'd be similar to my ultra slim model.

Like I said, my next polariser will be one of those DHG Marumis.
I did read a European based test of various polarisers and these DHGs came out either second or third in overall quality compared to CPLs costing 2-3x as much.
In fact I'm sure it was third overall, the the number one polariser was actually not a circular type, but the older linear type, and because of that, it was disqualified.
A circular polariser is generally preferable tho, as linear polarisers play havoc with modern AF systems(plus they're a lot harder to find).

apologies for the essay, but these are my experiences.

[Geoff Port]

Thankyou Arthur, you have given me the info required.

[jjphoto]

VS


B+W

Hoya


The above is the short version. I regularly use expensive and cheap polarising filters and was curious if there was a difference. I did some testing (with a very high resolution lens, Leica APO-Telyt-R 180/3.4) which are in the link below, the long version.

Polarizing filters, do they reduce image quality?

JJ

[richardb]

Heliopan filters are not bad at all.