[Medium FormatPro]

Could there really be that much of a difference between polarizing filters?

In the 82mm filter size for round polarizing filters they generally start off at about...

Vivitar 82mm Circular Polarizer Filter VIV-CPL-82 B&H Photo

...A whopping fifteen dollars; which is actually quite a bargain.

But on the other extreme go to over...

Singh-Ray 82mm LB ColorCombo Warm Circular Polarizer/LB RT-7 B&H

...Four hundred dollars, but has a few additional bell and whistle features thrown in...


Sure most all filters basically destroy most of the optical qualities of any lens. But if one really has a genuine need for a filter; what would one want, and also be able to get away with?

[top-quark]

For polarizing filters, check this article out:
Polarizing filters test - Introduction - Lenstip.com

There are degrees to which a filter degrades image quality. Since the point of a polarizer is to improve image quality under certain circumstances then the particular model does make a difference, I guess. While it's almost certainly not true that the most expensive option will be the best one, the opposite assertion almost certainly is: the cheapest option will be the worst.

In addition, I'm not sure I'd buy anything bearing such a degraded brand name as Vivitar.

[Docrwm]

I agree about filters generally and avoid them. I own a couple CPLs and lens protects (the latter for use in harsh environments with blowing sand, etc. only) but find that they all have drawbacks. I like Lenstip.com's review of the CPLs. Price made little difference, once you got above the super-affordable models, in the quality of light transmission. The Lenstip CPL review is a bit dated now, and should be redone, but still a good guide IMHO.
Polarizing filters test - Results and summary - Lenstip.com

[dboeren]

I'm curious about CPL's, that's the only filter I think I'd even consider, but I haven't bought one yet. The only filters I have are a couple of Haze/Skylight filters that came with old lenses I've bought. If I had to buy a CPL today I'd go with the Marumi, but I'm hoping to borrow one from a friend and try it out that way first.

[mikeSF]

i use a CPL quite often for water and foliage shooting.
when it comes to the wide spectrum of price vs quality, I am of the opinion that the cheapie $20 CPLs will negatively impact the image, the moderate range ($60-100) generally do not detract from IQ and function well, and the uber expensive ($400) are probably very high quality, but more for the cork sniffing camera elite...or those that do not drop a filter into the ocean every three months like I tend to do.

on that note, I would pay extra for filter rings and lenscaps to be painted with reflective coatings (like street signs use), so I can spot my dropped items with a flashlight at night before they wash out to sea. I just lost another lenscap in the river this past week and wouldve been able to grab it if it hadnt been so darn black.

[mikeSF]

...most all filters basically destroy most of the optical qualities of any lens...

that actually sounds overly harsh. An image is destroyed by poor composition, bad exposure, improper DOF, misfocusing, etc... A decent filter when used correctly may be almost completely undetectable.

[scratchpaddy]

I was wondering the same thing a little while ago. I wanted a 52mm CPL, which is much cheaper than 82mm (thank God!). The most expensive one I found was a Heliopan. I use a white-light scanner at work, which is a stereo camera that can make dimensionally accurate 3-d meshes from physical objects. All the hardware on it is German-built, ultra-calibrated, best-of-the-best-of-the-best stuff. The whole unit costs more than I'd ever spend on a car. It uses Schneider-Kreuznach lenses and Heliopan polarizers.

I eventually settled on a $64 B+W, mainly due to reviews like the ones posted earlier in the thread. Incidentally, Schneider makes B+W, so I'm still getting the same crazy German quality as the white light scanner.

It all comes down to risk. Yeah, you can get a Vivitar for $10, but you may have to deal with a greenish tint, or threads which don't quite screw in right, or really bad flare. They're not all bad, but there's a far greater chance of getting a bad one when you spend less money. I say get it right the first time, and you'll never have to spend more money on the same thing down the road.

---

Last edited by scratchpaddy; 04-29-2013 at 08:39 AM.

[VisualDarkness]

For polarizing filters, check this article out:
Polarizing filters test - Introduction - Lenstip.com

There are degrees to which a filter degrades image quality. Since the point of a polarizer is to improve image quality under certain circumstances then the particular model does make a difference, I guess. While it's almost certainly not true that the most expensive option will be the best one, the opposite assertion almost certainly is: the cheapest option will be the worst.

In addition, I'm not sure I'd buy anything bearing such a degraded brand name as Vivitar.

That article pretty much sums up everything about CPL filters.

[reeftool]

I bought a cheap CPL once, a Tri Star or something similar. I could just as easily have held up a pair of large, cheap sunglasses in front of my lens and maybe got better results. I got it along with a new lens and was close to returning the lens until I used the filter on another lens and discovered the problem.