FS5: Polarizer Confusion

jcskeeter

jcskeeter

Well-known member
Hi - I'm looking to get a polarizer to use in my 4x4 matte box. I've attempted to research the difference between the circular and linear and I just end up down a rabbit hole of scientific explanations and talk about prism cameras or dslrs.

I hope I'm not being to forward but I just want someone to tell me what to get. Circular or Linear. Not looking for brand but if you suggest one, I'd appreciate that also.

My use will be very general. Would be used more for surfaces than with water. If there are way more variables, I'd love to hash it out if so to narrow this down. Thanks for any help.

Would be used with FS5 and Canon L glass in matte box, like I mentioned above.
 
For video use, and from what I understand, no difference at all. It has more to do with not screwing up metering functions on SLR/DSLR camera's.

Just get the one that has the least light loss is my opinion (if there even is any difference in light loss that is).

Cheers,
 
I have a Schneider TruPol circular which I use in mattebox and it can produce great results.

Ned Soltz
 
3-chip video cameras with a beamsplitting prism assembly, and DSLRs with focus and metering sensors that depend on splitting the viewfinder mirror image, both require circular polarizers. Single-chip video cameras shouldn't be as sensitive to the difference. But it makes sense to me to choose a circular polarizer if in doubt because it will work with a wider variety of equipment.

There is no inherent visual difference between the two types, but circular polarizers may absorb a little more light and require more exposure compensation.

- Greg
 
I would say that my Schneider loses about 1.5 stops which on the FS5 shouldn't be a big deal. And I agree on the circular in case you ever want to use it with a DSLR.

Ned
 
I'm a Schneider TruPol fan as well.

I hope folks don't mind me posting this info to help sort things out......

The Schneider 138mm Mounted True-Pol Linear Polarizer Filter helps to reduce reflections and glare by filtering out light that has become polarized due to reflection from a non-metallic surface. The light from the sun naturally becomes partially polarized due to reflecting off electrons in air molecules, causing the light to scatter into what appears as haze. A polarizing filter arranges, and filters, this directionally polarized light perpendicularly to the reflected light, allowing for the absorption of much of this light. This results in a noticeable reduction of glare and reflections from non-metallic surfaces and an increase in the saturation of skies and foliage.

A linear polarizer differs from a circular polarizer in that it does not contain an additional quarter wave plane. The addition of a quarter wave plane is to circularly polarize linearly polarized light for the use of auto focus and exposure functions. Due to how the light is broken down and filtered with a linear polarizer, in-camera auto focus and exposure accuracy become skewed during use. When the light becomes circularly polarized, it permits the use of these functions.

This filter is recommended when not using in-camera exposure metering or autofocus. It is non-coated and delivers approximately 33% average light transmission. Constructed from Water White optical glass, it is 138mm in diameter and mounted for use in third-party or custom filter holders. No front or rear threads are included on this filter's ring, or mount.
Helps to reduce reflections and glare by filtering out light that has become polarized due to reflection from a non-metallic surface.Mounted without front or rear threads for use in third-party or custom filter holders for film and television cameras.Polarizing filters arrange, and filter, directionally polarized light perpendicularly to the reflected light, allowing for the absorption of much of the light.Clears up haze in distant landscapes and provides more saturated, vivid colors.Strongest effect when used at a 90° angle from the sun.Recommended when not using in-camera exposure metering or autofocus.Non-coated.Approximately 33% average light transmission.2.97x filter factor reduces exposure by 1.57 stops.Constructed from Water White optical glass.Filter Pouch for storage and transport.
 
The sense I get is that if you don’t need “auto focus and exposure functions”, then a linear polarizer is better. I assume your matt box allows you to rotate at least one of the filters.
 
A really great setup for polarizers is the Rotapola assembly, which fits a round polarizer into a 4x5" tray. The pola is rotated via gear on the top of the tray, which makes it more accessible than a typical rear-of-mattebox mounted round filter, and lower profile than a rotating tray (or useful for matteboxes that don't have rotating trays).
 
CP with FS5's ND (or auto ND)?

CP with FS5's ND (or auto ND)?

I will be shooting an outdoor event and want to use a polarizing filter to enhance the sky and reduce glare and reflections. Would a polarizing filter cause any issues with the FS5's auto ND? Is the FS5's variable ND filter a polarizing design? I'm just wondering if combined with a polarizing filter would cause problems.
 
jcskeeter said:
Thanks everyone! Helped a lot.
Click to expand...

Just do I do- purchase the really high-priced, high-quality polarizer with a mind towards the finest precision optics and then within a month or so end up using it scratched, dusty, and swirl marked.
 
The electronic variable ND of the FS5 interacts just fine with a linear or circular polarizer. Veydra sells the Revar RotaPola, which is the most affordable system. It features a circular pool, and as others have noted this filter type "could't hurt." Nothing bad about using a circular pool other than they can be more expensive than linear, but the price on this rig is about 1/4 what these things used to sell for just a few years ago.

http://www.veydra.com/product/revar-cine-rota-tray-4x5-65138mm-with-circular-polarizer/
 
I don't use a matte box, so not sure if they have a special drop in set-up that you can easily rotate. I use a CPL on my L glass, including the 70-200mm f/2.8. The problem is having to reach inside the lens shade and make small adjustments to the rotating ring of the CPL. It's hard to make fine adjustments and not get your fingerprints on the lens surface. Maybe with the matte box it's not so bad, but I guess I'd be looking for something with a bit of friction on the rotating part and as for quality, you get what you pay for. I only use the CPL when shooting through a window and can't use the LenSkirt for some reason, or when shooting lots of blue sky/water.

Mark
 
Don't use the Canon lens shade, just get one that screws on the Pola that solves the finger problem and at least on a 70-200 you won't vignette.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top