Circular polarising filter query

snerkler

That looks pretty extreme, never had anything that bad, even on 18mm FF.

Dandy76

I have used my CP filter without two many problems, as others have said by rotating the ring to remove pretty much all effect. The only thing I have had to do once or twice is adjust the exposure in slightly lower light conditions. One reason I did leave it on as it is also protecting the main (more expensive) lens behind it, so a double benefit. The only other pain is that if you are shooting portrait to landscape a lot, you of course need to constantly adjust the front of the lens, but easy enough to do.

AMc

Yup and I really didn't notice it was happening during my beach walk which is quite surprsing.
I suspect a perfect storm of angle, super bright sun and cloudless sky.

Faldrax

The light loss from a CPL is similar to that of a 1 - 1.5 stop ND filter (which might actually be useful if you've got bright sunshine in Cuba and want to open up the aperture wide!)

edward

Confess, I put a high quality UV filter on any lens that will take it, just to protect the glass. A CP as standard would mean constantly checking the orientation was best for each situation. I'm slow enough already, and with a lens hood in place...

Snake79

I would advise some careful consideration when using a polariser. I find it useful to reduce glare from windows, water, cars, wet ground and leaves. Using it to deepen the the blue sky and increase saturation on green and browns can be very nice too although be careful with the suns position in the sky as it can cause a the sky to be unbalanced with an unantural shade of blue on one side, especially on wider lenses

I find the dehaze slider in LR to be a good alternative to a polariser if all you want to do is add some extra puch to an image. A little to the right can be quite pleasing on certain images, just don't go mad with it. It won't replace a polariser completely as it can't see through glass and water.

snerkler

UV’s divide opinions tbh. I don’t use them as I find lens hoods offer all the protection I need but YMMV.
Well I’m back from my travels and pleased to report no ill effects from the CPL, it was on the lens permanently all holiday

12harry

Good to know it was a success...
this from Hoya's US website (hence spelling)

"....Circular polarizing filters allow photographers to achieve creative, in-camera, effects not possible after the image is created. A polarizing filter simply filters out unwanted reflections from non-metallic surfaces such as water and glass in addition to light reflecting off moisture and pollution in the atmosphere. By rotating the filter you can select just the right amount of filtration needed to achieve the creative effect. This results in bluer skies, greener leaves, reduced or eliminated reflections, and greater clarity in your final image...."



Since digital cameras allow the image to be checked, any unwanted effects can be minimised or removed entirely. My understanding;  a CPF is a conventional polarising filter with additional tech so it doesn't interfere with digital camera operation. They do appear to be more expensive - and as others have stated there is light-loss -  However, with modern sensors that may not be an issue, except at night perhaps, where an extra "stop" may mean a less-blurred picture.

Cheers.

wongataa

Circular polarisers are a regular linear polariser with a quarter wave plate to depolarise the light coming out of them.  They predated digital cameras by many years.  I had them for my film cameras.  They actually came about because linear polarisers can degrade autofocus performance in SLR (any kind) cameras.