Polarizer Filter Worth it?

salils

salils

Well-known member
I am on a pretty tight budget, just curious, is it worth it to purchase a polarizer filter? I shoot a variety of things both indoors and outdoors. (everything from shorts, interviews, event videography, etc)
Could I achieve a similar effect in post with some color correction? (for example, when I realized I could achieve scene file settings with some color correction in post, I oppted for post)
 
You can't really polarize in post, because it affects different parts of the image differently.

I think it's a filter that's worth it if you get a high quality one. If you get a crappy one, you might as well not use it.
 
You will have to take into consideration light loss when you are using it. Your image will get a lot darker. They can be very worthwhile tho. Id say get one.
 
As bballplaya said, a polarizer is one of the few filters that you cannot emulate in post. It can remove reflections from glass or water, and it can darken blue skies nicely, and it can really make grass and trees "pop" (grass and tree leaves can be highly reflective, resulting in glare; the polarizer can eliminate that and lets the raw color shine through).

A good polarizer is a great filter to have in the kit. A lousy cheap polarizer (or any lousy cheap filter) is probably not worth putting on the lens.

And yes, as ian said, a polarizer will definitely induce light loss, usually on the order of about 1.5 stops (which means it can also sometimes serve as an impromptu neutral density filter when you need a bit more ND).
 
Ditto to all here...

Get a good one. I use them all the time.

The clouds in my avatar remain thanks to a circular polarizer.
 
Personally I'd get top quality or not bother at all - you really don't want to put bad glass in front of that beautiful Leica lens of yours....
Hoya or B+W multicoated is the way to go.
I think 2filter.com is the cheapest US dealer.

I use a Hoya that I originally bought for my DSLR. Got it cheap from a reputable Hong Kong dealer: http://hvstar.net/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=14
 
RSLV,
FYI: Tiffen isn't "bad glass". Tiffen filters have been a film industry staple for many years. Some filters have more layers of "multicoating" , but if you're shading your lens properly (as in Matte box) you'll never see the difference between top quality filters, except, possibly the amount of extinction built into the material itself.
(I think it's B+W that advertises complete black at maximum).
Almost all Pola filters have a slight color cast due to the polarization material, so you should white balance with the filter on the lens. In any case it's nothing that can't be easily corrected in post.
Hoya and B+W are also very good filters.
Just stay away from the no-name imports (3 filters for $39.00 kind of stuff on ebay ).
Hope this helps.
Ken
the Screen Skins guy
 
Does it matter if I get a cirular or linear polarizer? (for video camera use, DVX100B) The tiffen I linked to is Linear where as the one RSLV linked to is circular??
 
Tiffen circular 72mm

Tiffen circular 72mm

adloos said:
Circular or linear? Just wonder also which one is better.
Click to expand...

I purchased the Tiffen "kit" with the UV and the circular polarizer in 72mm (Tiffen Twin Pack from B&H for $79.95) - I leave the UV on all the time to protect the lens on the DVX - and on bright days - the polarizer is a good neutral density filter - something like a .3 or 3 stops -
 
I use my polariser in the exact manner described by Barry and its great to have in the bag.

Consultant, many people are advocates for protecting the lens with a UV filter. I am not one of them. I prefer to shoot straight through the camera lens where possible, I do use effect filters, polariser, m2 with extra lens on front, but when and if I can, extra glass that wont enhance my shot but has a possibility to degrade my image is way off my list.

Take a quality Leica lens then add a cheap piece of glass to the front? Not I. Of course I need to be extra aware in the care department.
 
circular polarizers are the ****; but watch what they do to your greens though. definitely NOT cool in that sense
 
Agreed, Color. I've used them forever but it took switching to a new still camera to really start noticing that. I could be seeing things. I don't know. Might be time to run some tests. In theory, you wouldn't think that it would happen.
 
I really like the polarizers to remove reflections, especially if you film anything with a car scene. As for the linar vs circular, in the photography world the linar filters have problems with the autofocus, so best to stay with circular for autofocus.

Rob
 
Ditto on the Schneider. I do use a circular. I don't use 'auto' anything... focus or otherwise. Don't know why you would.
 
In terms of the HVX or DVX, there is no difference between using a Circular and Linear polarizer - except maybe that a Linear may actually be a bit stronger in its polarizing, and be cheaper on average.
 
The name circular polarizer isn't really accurate. All polarizing filters are linear, that's the nature of the filtering mechanism. A circular polarizer has an extra piece of glass behind the polarizing element called a quarter-wave retarder. This part of the filter "unpolarizes" the light that has passed through the polarizing element.

The reason this was originally necessary was due to the way some cameras used prisms to deflect light to a light meter. Prisms act like semi-polarizing filters and if you cross polarizers you block light. This would upset the exposure. I have been told that most video cameras do not need circular polarizes.

A linear polarizer has the same effect no matter which side you look through. A circular polarizer works correctly from only one direction. Try looking through one the wrong way.

When comparing filters of equal quality, the only difference would be the increased expense of the circular polarizer.

Pete
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top