[Green_Manelishi]

Not too expensive, but not so inexpensive I'll be dis-satisfied.

Thanks

G_M

[Ratmagiclady]

Ooh, someone who likes an Islay malt.

My favorite, too.


Anyway, I'm told that you can use a linear polarizer on the Pentax DSLRs, believe it or not, if that helps. (And you find a bargain on one, for that matter)

What size lens thread are you talking about? Some good brands are B+W, Marumi, Hoya's better lines, Nikon... Heliopan, etc. If you don't mind step rings, Ebay is full of lovely B+W ones in 55mm for quite cheap. (For some reason, Kodak had a bazillion of em made at some point, it seems. ) Anyway, convenient size for me, cause of my old Canon stuff, but I know they live happily on step rings with the smaller Pentax primes. I don't think I've actually tried with the kit lens. Just for an option.

[Bactman]

What about Marumi CPLs? There are a few on the board that have tried Marumis and have overall given them positive results.

[Green_Manelishi]

Ooh, someone who likes an Islay malt.

My favorite, too.

Nicely done. My preference is Ardbeg, wife's is Laphroaig. We both enjoy Lagavulin too but it's rather $$$.

Anyway, I'm told that you can use a linear polarizer on the Pentax DSLRs, believe it or not, if that helps. (And you find a bargain on one, for that matter)

What size lens thread are you talking about?

52mm

Some good brands are B+W, Marumi, Hoya's better lines, Nikon... Heliopan, etc. If you don't mind step rings, Ebay is full of lovely B+W ones in 55mm for quite cheap. (For some reason, Kodak had a bazillion of em made at some point, it seems. ) Anyway, convenient size for me, cause of my old Canon stuff, but I know they live happily on step rings with the smaller Pentax primes. I don't think I've actually tried with the kit lens. Just for an option.

Thanks for the recommendations. I'll do some research.

[shadowulf]

I usually buy the better Tiffen or mid-range Hoyas. Whichever I can get a better price on

[marcdsgn]

I believe I had problems with a Marumi polarizer on my K10D; Mainly the image was blurred, even after manual focussing. I'm assuming it was due to being a linear filter. Now you guys have me doubting my camera instead of the filter!

[Ben_Edict]

I believe I had problems with a Marumi polarizer on my K10D; Mainly the image was blurred, even after manual focussing. I'm assuming it was due to being a linear filter. Now you guys have me doubting my camera instead of the filter!

A linear filter will not blurr the image, if you focus manually. It is reported to render the AF unreliable, but in fact, I have only read people repeating something they read about this effect, never have seen a real first-hand report. To the contrary I have read several reports, where photogs actually used linear polarizers without any problems...

With cameras like the Pentax LX and Nikon F3 and some OMs exposure was off, when using linear polarizers, as these cameras had their silicone cells in the mirror chamber and they received the light via a semi-transparent mirror, which polarizes the light. That leads, in combination with the linear polarizer on the lens, to double polarization and the expsoure meter will receive much less light = the whole image gets overexposed. But the current DSLRs (at least all Pentaxes) have their exposure meter very conservativley built into the viewfinder and that does not necessitate circular polarizers. Only AF would do that, though I cannot quite understand, why a phase shift AF would be affected by the polarizer in front (apart from having less light to work with).

In fact, Mike Cash has posted some of his tests here in the forum, which emphasize my statement:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/37496-k20d-linear-...on-photos.html


So, coming back to your post: if the image was blurred with the filter on camera, it is probably due to either camera shake (prolonged exposure time) or too poor filter quality, not due to the working principle.
Ben

---

Last edited by Ben_Edict; 04-03-2009 at 03:26 AM.

[Ben_Edict]

Not too expensive, but not so inexpensive I'll be dis-satisfied.

I can only comment on those filters I actually use:

B+W standard circular polarizer (not the much more expensive Käsemann-variety): works nicely with no discernible colour hue added to the image. Very massively built.

Cokin circular polarizer in P-size: works, but adds strange, hard to correct greenish hue to the image. I find that unusable

Kood CPL for Cokin-P. Bought that after reading several recommendations on the web. It's cheap and maybe adds less strange colour to the image. The outer rim is like a saw with sharp teeth - a bit annoying in use...

Hoya cheap green-line CPL (don't know, why I bough that). Uncoated or single-coated (don't know yet), but works. Highly reflective surface, which is not desirable...

Kenko Pro1 Digital (aka Hoya Pro1 Digital, Kenko is the Hoya brand name for the Japanese market). Nearly as good as the B+W, just a slight colour tint, but in most scenes I would not recognize it. The advantage over the above mentioned B+W (which is an older modell): better multi-coating and slim profile, which makes it usable with extreme wide-angle lenses. I have had two occurances, where the filter thread stubbornly stuck on Sigma EX lenses and I had a hard time removing it...

So, overall the B+W is the very best filter, but the Kenko Pro1 Digital has a better price-performance ratio and some real world advantages, if you need it for wide-angle lenses. Ofcourse the slim profile B+W Käsemann filters would probably be better - but at a price.

Ben

[losecontrol]

Hoya is great and kenko and hoya is almost the same. so I would say: Kenko

[Ben_Edict]

Hoya is great and kenko and hoya is almost the same. so I would say: Kenko

Hoya and Kenko are exactly the same, expect for the brand name. It is amazing how much cheaper Kenkos are offered on ebay.

Ben

[Paul Hunt]

Another vote for the Kenko Pro1.

I use them on my 16-45 and 12-24. Living in a place plagued with sunshine, I find I use my CP filters often.

Paul

[Ratmagiclady]

Verra cool. (Frankly, you almost may as well have a CPL regardless of any issues: they're pretty much all made that way, these days, and you never know when you might want to put it on a camera that requires one. Fact is, the good ones are still pricey, but no longer because this is an exotic thing for certain AF cameras: I think in part they come in 57 flavors and any degree of quality you'd like is cause digital has really reduced the number of things you need to buy from a filter maker. Which isn't to say a nice one isn't actually worth what you might pay. Just a question of 'how nice' means *what* to you. I'm a bit of a tech Luddite, about some things, but I really think they've been improving polarizers. )

As for the notion linear polarizers would work fine on Pentax digitals, , that's what someone here told me, ...I've had no cause to test the theory: the only linear ones I have are a redundant with a nice CPL I've got, and I think a little cooked.

(I kind of keep them around to demonstrate things for students, and for beaters, cause it usually seems that by the time I really think I need a polarizer, the sun's beating down and all matter of sand and salt spray is flying around. ) . Apart from diffusers, I rarely use filters on the tighter lenses I favor, anyway.

Being rather sun-sensitive, I rarely want a polarizer unless I'm trying to bring out some of the saturation in wet things. (they aren't just for sunny skies and glassy buildings, you know. )

So, if there's doubt about what I said, re: compatibility, don't quote me on it.

[Agnostic]

And another vote for the Kenko Pro1. Works like a charm, don't have any complaints about it. And they are not very expensive (much cheaper than the identical Hoya branded ones)

[soccerjoe5]

Going through B+W, Kenko, Hoya, Marumi and Sunpak: Marumi's DHG filters are my favorite. Fantastic performance for its price. B+W is a tiny bit better but you can't notice it really. Better and easier to clean than Hoya/Kenkos.

[newarts]

I use an inexpensive Sonia CPL & had seen no defect.

Dave