Polarizers on wide angle lenses

**BarryE** · 03-16-2018, 11:29 AM

... or more specific the 31mm Limited on FF.

I've never been a fan of polarisers, for my photography, but I thought I'd give one a go on the 31mm. I occasionally use one in the 50 to 77 range when want to 'see' below the surface of water, or when it might benefit to reduce haze etc, etc

I use B+W exclusively, so a circular polariser will be pricey. Therefore I'm trying to quantify if 31mm is wide enough that I may end up fighting gradients across blue skies, for instance.

Anyone use a polariser regularly on the 31?

Many thanks

stevebrot · 03-16-2018, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by BarryE

Therefore I'm trying to quantify if 31mm is wide enough that I may end up fighting gradients across blue skies, for instance.

If shooting FF, that answer is that there may not be consistent effect across the full sky. That is simply how it is with polarizers and it is simply made visible as the view widens.

Steve

(...does not own the FA 31, but has shot for years at 28mm with polarizer on film...)

**jatrax** · 03-16-2018, 12:03 PM

Not on the 31mm but I did a trip to Crater Lake NP with the K-3II and the 16-50. I put on a polarizer thinking I would get better results on the deep blue colors. Anything 24mm or wider was ruined. Anything 24mm to 35mm was marginal and only shots 40mm and up were what I considered good. A lesson learned and I'm using the polarizer a lot more carefully now.

That is with the K-3II so APS-C, with FF I would think 31mm would show noticeable gradients if you allow much sky in the photo.

**clickclick** · 03-16-2018, 12:43 PM - **1 Like**

I use polarizers all the time on wide angle. Key is to pay attention to how uneven the sky may be and back off as needed. You can still get good benefit if you do it right without over doing it. Check this article - it has helped friends of mine:

How to Use a Polarizing Filter

and this:

Are Polarizing, ND and UV Filters Useless?

Hope this helps.

**BarryE** · 03-16-2018, 01:58 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

Not on the 31mm but I did a trip to Crater Lake NP with the K-3II and the 16-50. I put on a polarizer thinking I would get better results on the deep blue colors. Anything 24mm or wider was ruined. Anything 24mm to 35mm was marginal and only shots 40mm and up were what I considered good. A lesson learned and I'm using the polarizer a lot more carefully now.

That is with the K-3II so APS-C, with FF I would think 31mm would show noticeable gradients if you allow much sky in the photo.

Thanks John. At 31mm the Limited does fall in this awkward region. Maybe a little careful usage is the approach ... but, then maybe that is just going to reduce it's usefulness, especially when the sun is low.

---------- Post added 03-16-18 at 09:08 PM ----------

Originally posted by clickclick

I use polarizers all the time on wide angle. Key is to pay attention to how uneven the sky may be and back off as needed. You can still get good benefit if you do it right without over doing it. Check this article - it has helped friends of mine:

How to Use a Polarizing Filter

and this:

Are Polarizing, ND and UV Filters Useless?

Hope this helps.

Thanks. It's this low level sun & wide angle that gets me. I take most of my saleable shots at sunrise, especially in the winter. Your link reinforces that I may well have an issue on the 31mm. However, there is clearly a light touch approach with a perhaps a little graduated filtering in PP that may offer me some scope.

I see the link refers to the B+W nano filter that I had chosen - I have a 49mm version, which is good, when I occasionally get it out of my bag.

**clickclick** · 03-16-2018, 02:21 PM - **1 Like**

Yep, low sun and UWA is difficult. That's where a light touch comes into play. I came across a good tutorial on using the graduated filter in LR to do some sky correction. Are you familiar with this? I can try to find it and post the link if you like.

**ChrisPlatt** · 03-16-2018, 02:46 PM

The effect is not unlike vignetting in reverse, and can be quite objectionable.

In general the wider the lens the more pronounced the effect.
A lens with a steeply curved front element may tend to exhibit it more.

Using my 35mm film cameras this effect is noticeable using even 35mm focal length lenses.

Chris

maw · 03-16-2018, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by BarryE

I've never been a fan of polarisers, for my photography, but I thought I'd give one a go on the 31mm

Strange case just today I got the 31mm limited from Japan, the issue of polarizers (but in general of all filters), is always controversial, often are the reviews that mislead the real value of the filter,
it remains to be said that the polarizer is a particular filter (can not be postproduced), so the purchase should be made after some tests or after reading and comparing many reviews on the same product.

So I don't recommend any particular brand. Just to name one, I bought a filter from the Poles that came from Russia,
that's excellent. Another thing to keep in mind "the sun must always be on your left or right", never in front or behind.

I put two links to you that will help you in your choice:

Test result polarizing filters

Polarizing filters test

**clackers** · 03-16-2018, 02:55 PM - **1 Like**

Just chimp to check your shot's not too weird, recompose as necessary or even take filter off.

We're photographers, it's what we do.

**jatrax** · 03-16-2018, 03:45 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by clackers

Just chimp to check your shot's not too weird, recompose as necessary or even take filter off. We're photographers, it's what we do.

Sadly I was so excited being inside the crater and actually on the water that I never even thought to look. Came home with an unforgettable experience but not nearly as many good shots as I should have. Just a learning experience.

**jatrax** · 03-16-2018, 03:49 PM - **1 Like**

I've trashed most of the really obvious ones but this is what to watch out for. This is at 15mm with the DA 12-24.

Photobill · 03-16-2018, 06:36 PM

If you use it exclusively for land scape that includes the sky, I would say it will be very iffy. With such a wide lens on a FF it will be tuff to keep from getting fall off from the polarizing affect. But as you mentioned shooting into water are taking glare off of windows it will work perfectly. I think it will still be a very good tool if used sparingly.

stevebrot · 03-16-2018, 07:29 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by clackers

Just chimp to check your shot's not too weird, recompose as necessary or even take filter off.

I don't shoot with polarizers much anymore, but when I did, I routinely took the filter off the camera and used it to scope the sky to determine effect at various positions. Angle is everything.

Steve

**BarryE** · 03-17-2018, 12:50 AM

Originally posted by stevebrot

I don't shoot with polarizers much anymore, but when I did, I routinely took the filter off the camera and used it to scope the sky to determine effect at various positions...

Steve

Mmmm, done that too

---------- Post added 03-17-18 at 08:07 AM ----------

Originally posted by jatrax

I've trashed most of the really obvious ones but this is what to watch out for. This is at 15mm with the DA 12-24.

As Clackers says chimp. Yet, I find that I only notice the obvious things on the camera's screen. This example sideways, graduated sky could easily be missed, especially on a bright day and when I'm having to move quickly around as the light is changing fast.

In the past I have used Hoya polarisers on my 16-50 (at the wide end) and graduated skies did catch me a few times. I only noticed them when I got home. The shots were basically useless, but nice and colourful

Gave up with them doing this a couple of times.

The K1 has a bigger screen than cropped cameras and the 31 is only one FL, so with chimping and care, a polariser may have some uses, it seems, from what folk here are saying.

I've just looked at the B+W price for a 58mm nano polariser in the UK - £159 ($220) from my usual supplier. I'm planning to visit the Photography Show at the NEC, UK sometime over the next 4 days and this polariser was on my, 'maybe' list. It's looking a little more maybe than before ...

Thanks for your input ...

wanderer2 · 03-17-2018, 03:28 AM

Originally posted by maw

Strange case just today I got the 31mm limited from Japan, the issue of polarizers (but in general of all filters), is always controversial, often are the reviews that mislead the real value of the filter,
it remains to be said that the polarizer is a particular filter (can not be postproduced), so the purchase should be made after some tests or after reading and comparing many reviews on the same product.

So I don't recommend any particular brand. Just to name one, I bought a filter from the Poles that came from Russia,
that's excellent. Another thing to keep in mind "the sun must always be on your left or right", never in front or behind.

I put two links to you that will help you in your choice:

Test result polarizing filters

Polarizing filters test

Lenstip has done a more recent comparison test than the 2009 one, in either 2015 or 2016 as best I recall. It's on the same website as the 2009 test and has more recent models in the test.

03-16-2018, 11:29 AM	#1
BarryE Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Hampshire, UK Posts: 1,654	Polarizers on wide angle lenses ... or more specific the 31mm Limited on FF. I've never been a fan of polarisers, for my photography, but I thought I'd give one a go on the 31mm. I occasionally use one in the 50 to 77 range when want to 'see' below the surface of water, or when it might benefit to reduce haze etc, etc I use B+W exclusively, so a circular polariser will be pricey. Therefore I'm trying to quantify if 31mm is wide enough that I may end up fighting gradients across blue skies, for instance. Anyone use a polariser regularly on the 31? Many thanks

03-16-2018, 02:48 PM	#8
maw Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Sassari (Italy) Posts: 1,118	Originally posted by BarryE I've never been a fan of polarisers, for my photography, but I thought I'd give one a go on the 31mm Strange case just today I got the 31mm limited from Japan, the issue of polarizers (but in general of all filters), is always controversial, often are the reviews that mislead the real value of the filter, it remains to be said that the polarizer is a particular filter (can not be postproduced), so the purchase should be made after some tests or after reading and comparing many reviews on the same product. So I don't recommend any particular brand. Just to name one, I bought a filter from the Poles that came from Russia, that's excellent. Another thing to keep in mind "the sun must always be on your left or right", never in front or behind. I put two links to you that will help you in your choice: Test result polarizing filters Polarizing filters test Last edited by maw; 03-17-2018 at 03:30 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Polarizers for DA15mm	BruceBanner	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	13	02-03-2018 05:19 PM
Get wide angle lens from an extreme angle lens	jorgegetafe	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	10-08-2015 12:53 AM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma Lenses and Sigma Polarizers	JHD	Sold Items	30	03-04-2012 01:29 PM
polarizers and wide angles	ryno	Photographic Technique	6	02-25-2008 12:19 PM

03-16-2018, 11:56 AM	#2
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by BarryE Therefore I'm trying to quantify if 31mm is wide enough that I may end up fighting gradients across blue skies, for instance. If shooting FF, that answer is that there may not be consistent effect across the full sky. That is simply how it is with polarizers and it is simply made visible as the view widens. Steve (...does not own the FA 31, but has shot for years at 28mm with polarizer on film...)

03-16-2018, 12:03 PM	#3
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,992	Not on the 31mm but I did a trip to Crater Lake NP with the K-3II and the 16-50. I put on a polarizer thinking I would get better results on the deep blue colors. Anything 24mm or wider was ruined. Anything 24mm to 35mm was marginal and only shots 40mm and up were what I considered good. A lesson learned and I'm using the polarizer a lot more carefully now. That is with the K-3II so APS-C, with FF I would think 31mm would show noticeable gradients if you allow much sky in the photo.

03-16-2018, 12:43 PM - 1 Like	#4
clickclick Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: East Coast Posts: 2,904	I use polarizers all the time on wide angle. Key is to pay attention to how uneven the sky may be and back off as needed. You can still get good benefit if you do it right without over doing it. Check this article - it has helped friends of mine: How to Use a Polarizing Filter and this: Are Polarizing, ND and UV Filters Useless? Hope this helps.

03-16-2018, 01:58 PM	#5
BarryE Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Hampshire, UK Posts: 1,654 Original Poster	Originally posted by jatrax Not on the 31mm but I did a trip to Crater Lake NP with the K-3II and the 16-50. I put on a polarizer thinking I would get better results on the deep blue colors. Anything 24mm or wider was ruined. Anything 24mm to 35mm was marginal and only shots 40mm and up were what I considered good. A lesson learned and I'm using the polarizer a lot more carefully now. That is with the K-3II so APS-C, with FF I would think 31mm would show noticeable gradients if you allow much sky in the photo. Thanks John. At 31mm the Limited does fall in this awkward region. Maybe a little careful usage is the approach ... but, then maybe that is just going to reduce it's usefulness, especially when the sun is low. ---------- Post added 03-16-18 at 09:08 PM ---------- Originally posted by clickclick I use polarizers all the time on wide angle. Key is to pay attention to how uneven the sky may be and back off as needed. You can still get good benefit if you do it right without over doing it. Check this article - it has helped friends of mine: How to Use a Polarizing Filter and this: Are Polarizing, ND and UV Filters Useless? Hope this helps. Thanks. It's this low level sun & wide angle that gets me. I take most of my saleable shots at sunrise, especially in the winter. Your link reinforces that I may well have an issue on the 31mm. However, there is clearly a light touch approach with a perhaps a little graduated filtering in PP that may offer me some scope. I see the link refers to the B+W nano filter that I had chosen - I have a 49mm version, which is good, when I occasionally get it out of my bag.

03-16-2018, 02:21 PM - 1 Like	#6
clickclick Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: East Coast Posts: 2,904	Yep, low sun and UWA is difficult. That's where a light touch comes into play. I came across a good tutorial on using the graduated filter in LR to do some sky correction. Are you familiar with this? I can try to find it and post the link if you like.

03-16-2018, 02:46 PM	#7
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,702	The effect is not unlike vignetting in reverse, and can be quite objectionable. In general the wider the lens the more pronounced the effect. A lens with a steeply curved front element may tend to exhibit it more. Using my 35mm film cameras this effect is noticeable using even 35mm focal length lenses. Chris

03-16-2018, 02:55 PM - 1 Like	#9
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Just chimp to check your shot's not too weird, recompose as necessary or even take filter off. We're photographers, it's what we do.

03-16-2018, 03:45 PM - 1 Like	#10
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,992	Originally posted by clackers Just chimp to check your shot's not too weird, recompose as necessary or even take filter off. We're photographers, it's what we do. Sadly I was so excited being inside the crater and actually on the water that I never even thought to look. Came home with an unforgettable experience but not nearly as many good shots as I should have. Just a learning experience.

03-16-2018, 06:36 PM	#12
Photobill Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2018 Location: Southern Oregon Posts: 228	If you use it exclusively for land scape that includes the sky, I would say it will be very iffy. With such a wide lens on a FF it will be tuff to keep from getting fall off from the polarizing affect. But as you mentioned shooting into water are taking glare off of windows it will work perfectly. I think it will still be a very good tool if used sparingly.

03-16-2018, 07:29 PM - 1 Like	#13
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by clackers Just chimp to check your shot's not too weird, recompose as necessary or even take filter off. I don't shoot with polarizers much anymore, but when I did, I routinely took the filter off the camera and used it to scope the sky to determine effect at various positions. Angle is everything. Steve

03-17-2018, 12:50 AM	#14
BarryE Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Hampshire, UK Posts: 1,654 Original Poster	Originally posted by stevebrot I don't shoot with polarizers much anymore, but when I did, I routinely took the filter off the camera and used it to scope the sky to determine effect at various positions... Steve Mmmm, done that too ---------- Post added 03-17-18 at 08:07 AM ---------- Originally posted by jatrax I've trashed most of the really obvious ones but this is what to watch out for. This is at 15mm with the DA 12-24. As Clackers says chimp. Yet, I find that I only notice the obvious things on the camera's screen. This example sideways, graduated sky could easily be missed, especially on a bright day and when I'm having to move quickly around as the light is changing fast. In the past I have used Hoya polarisers on my 16-50 (at the wide end) and graduated skies did catch me a few times. I only noticed them when I got home. The shots were basically useless, but nice and colourful Gave up with them doing this a couple of times. The K1 has a bigger screen than cropped cameras and the 31 is only one FL, so with chimping and care, a polariser may have some uses, it seems, from what folk here are saying. I've just looked at the B+W price for a 58mm nano polariser in the UK - £159 ($220) from my usual supplier. I'm planning to visit the Photography Show at the NEC, UK sometime over the next 4 days and this polariser was on my, 'maybe' list. It's looking a little more maybe than before ... Thanks for your input ...

03-17-2018, 03:28 AM	#15
wanderer2 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 301	Originally posted by maw Strange case just today I got the 31mm limited from Japan, the issue of polarizers (but in general of all filters), is always controversial, often are the reviews that mislead the real value of the filter, it remains to be said that the polarizer is a particular filter (can not be postproduced), so the purchase should be made after some tests or after reading and comparing many reviews on the same product. So I don't recommend any particular brand. Just to name one, I bought a filter from the Poles that came from Russia, that's excellent. Another thing to keep in mind "the sun must always be on your left or right", never in front or behind. I put two links to you that will help you in your choice: Test result polarizing filters Polarizing filters test Lenstip has done a more recent comparison test than the 2009 one, in either 2015 or 2016 as best I recall. It's on the same website as the 2009 test and has more recent models in the test.