Polarizing Filter

[scoot241]

I went back and forth with those three lenses and ended up buying the Sigma for a good price on eBay. Keep an eye out and you can get the Sigma for much less than $440. The Sigma has become my primary lens and I use it for just about everything right now. I need a nice telephoto lens at some point, but that won't be for a while.

The Sigma lens also includes the hood, while the Canon lenses do not.

I have a UV filter for my kit lens but it's not a very good one and I thought it was degrading my picture quality so I don't use it anymore. I haven't gotten one for my Sigma.

UV filters are mostly just to protect the front element. Polarizing filters actually have an effect on the picture. The thing they help the most is making the sky look more blue in outdoor pictures. You would be able to keep a UV filter on at all times, but a polarizing filter requires more light and would not work well indoors.

 

[KarenAylwood]

Thanks Scoot!

I have a UV filter too- but it's not a nice one. It came with my Canon XSi set (had the bag, and an extra battery too). I think I'm mostly interested in the star filter but not sure which lens I'd want to put it on... it seems that if I get one of the above that I mentioned- I'd want it for that!

I looked on ebay- you're definitely right. I saw prices ranging from $275 - $375 on there. I'll have to look there once I'm ready (finances aren't the best right now with it being wedding season!).

Question... once I get the 100mm macro- will this be good for night photography? I'm guessing it's faster than my 18-200mm.

 

[bob100]

I have my 18-55mm kit lens (I admit I don't use it much anymore), along with an 18-200mm lens, and will be getting the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro lens within a few weeks (birthday present).

I'm looking at the possibility of a prime lens. I hate switching lenses out, and want to get the lens I'd be happiest with since I don't plan on buying another for a while (famous last words).

I'm looking at the following...

Canon 50mm f/1.8 ($115)
Canon 50mm f/1.4 ($400)
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 ($440)

I can save up and wait to get the more expensive lens if it really is far better and worth the extra money. Which would I end up liking the best and getting the most use out of?? I'd like something I could use to photograph friends and family- at home and at events like weddings, etc.


Second part... I have no filters but was looking at getting a star filter or a UV filter. Then I saw that there are polarising filters.... what's the difference between a UV filter and a polarising filter? Which is more useful for outdoor/ nature shots? If shooting outdoors, could I leave this filter on all the time? Could I leave this on the camera even indoors?
Thanks in advance!!

if you don't like switching lens why are you looking at primes? here's what I have with my XSi - the kit lens 18-55IS, 55-250IS and the 50 1.8 -
For me these lens cover just about any situation. Although I have a polarizing filter and an "ND" neutral density filter generally I don't use filters because they degrade the image quality and can affect the "AF" auto focusing, I find Photoshop can do most of the filter effects better

 

[boBQuincy]

Second part... I have no filters but was looking at getting a star filter or a UV filter. Then I saw that there are polarising filters.... what's the difference between a UV filter and a polarising filter? Which is more useful for outdoor/ nature shots? If shooting outdoors, could I leave this filter on all the time? Could I leave this on the camera even indoors?

Thanks in advance!!

The difference between a UV and a polarizing filter is that the polarizing filter is actually useful! Apart from a dubious level of protection UV filters add nothing but poor ones can subtract quite a bit from image quality. Polarizing filters can be left on the lens when ever there is enough light but since they do take up a lot of light it is usually not good to use them indoors or at night.

 

[ukcatfan]

I recently bought into the Cokin filter system. I did so to get a graduated ND filter, but also picked up a regular ND and a "just for fun" blue/red polarizing filter (see example below). Apart from that system, I also have a polarizing and star filter. These filter effects are basically the things that cannot be reproduced in Photoshop.

 

[pointandshoot]

Question... once I get the 100mm macro- will this be good for night photography? I'm guessing it's faster than my 18-200mm.

Yes, it is faster and this lens has a great reputation. It seems to be out of stock in many places. Nice grab getting one!

The general rule of thumb for hand holding a camera and getting a sharp image is having a shutter speed of at least 1/mm of the lens. That means you need to shoot at shutter speeds around 1/125 for this lens or faster when hand holding your camera.

If you are shooting at night with a tripod, shutter speed does not matter as much. Mount and shoot away at slower shutter speeds. If you plan to hand hold the camera, you will need to either crank down the the aperature towards 2.8 as it gets darker or crank up the iso (and the image noise) to gain sharp images. This is where image stabilization comes in. So long as your subjects are stationary, IS lets you shoot at slower shutter speeds while holding your camera in low light. 2.8 is plenty fast for many situations.

I expect you will get some great images with this lens. Please share. I need a little bit encouragement to push me over the edge and fire up my credit card.

Chuck

 

[KarenAylwood]

if you don't like switching lens why are you looking at primes? here's what I have with my XSi - the kit lens 18-55IS, 55-250IS and the 50 1.8 -
For me these lens cover just about any situation. Although I have a polarizing filter and an "ND" neutral density filter generally I don't use filters because they degrade the image quality and can affect the "AF" auto focusing, I find Photoshop can do most of the filter effects better

I guess what I meant by not switching out is that I don't really want multiple lenses for the same situation. I can travel and do landscape/nature photography with my 18-200, will do macro (mostly) with my 100mm and I'd like something for portraits/events/people in general- something with more of a capability for shallow depth of field/bokeh. So I'd like to pick one of those three, rather than getting the "nifty fifty" just because it's cheap and a good buy. If the 30mm is better, I'd rather get that than wish I had bought it later and try to sell the nifty fifty or just never use it at all. I do want multiple lenses, I just don't want to buy something just to buy it.

Yes, it is faster and this lens has a great reputation. It seems to be out of stock in many places. Nice grab getting one!

The general rule of thumb for hand holding a camera and getting a sharp image is having a shutter speed of at least 1/mm of the lens. That means you need to shoot at shutter speeds around 1/125 for this lens or faster when hand holding your camera.

If you are shooting at night with a tripod, shutter speed does not matter as much. Mount and shoot away at slower shutter speeds. If you plan to hand hold the camera, you will need to either crank down the the aperature towards 2.8 as it gets darker or crank up the iso (and the image noise) to gain sharp images. This is where image stabilization comes in. So long as your subjects are stationary, IS lets you shoot at slower shutter speeds while holding your camera in low light. 2.8 is plenty fast for many situations.

I expect you will get some great images with this lens. Please share. I need a little bit encouragement to push me over the edge and fire up my credit card.

Chuck

I absolutely love macro photography (I have no actual experience with it though!) and it was the first lens I wanted after my 18-200 (like you said, great reputation). I was on the notify list for B&H- they seem to get it back in stock every few weeks. But Adorama has had it in stock for at least a week or two now. Although I usually watch B&H so I'm not sure how long Adorama has had it. I'm really excited to play with it! My birthday is June 30th, so I expect to get it sometime around then.

Thanks for the rule of thumb... that's much easier for me to remember than some others I've heard

Those pics are great, ukcatfan! Very cool looking effect.

Thanks BobQuincy for the filter explanation- I think I'm leaning towards a polarizing filter and a star filter. I do a lot of outdoor photography so the polarizing would probably get used a lot!

Oh how I wish money grew on trees...

 

[Experiment_626]

I recently bought into the Cokin filter system. I did so to get a graduated ND filter, but also picked up a regular ND and a "just for fun" blue/red polarizing filter.

That red/blue polarizer is the coolest thing I've seen in a while! If you don't mind my asking, how much does such a thing cost? You can PM the answer if you like, even if that answer is "None of your beeswax."

SSB

 

[ukcatfan]

I got it on clearance from Adorama for $17! You do have to have the Cokin system though, which will set you back about $40 for the adapter and filter folder.

 

[jann1033]

have you considered the tamron 90mm macro? it's rated as well and has a better warranty

 

[boBQuincy]

Following ZackieDawg's lead, I bought a heavy ND filter (6 stops) to use for motion blur in daylight. I also use it with a polarizer for a total of about 8 stops, enough to allow easy 1 second shutter speed in daylight. The subject is not WDW but we all know how much Walt Disney loved trains so there is some connection.

These were all taken today (Sunday) at the NC Transportation Museum's "Rail Days" festival. Some of the photos are not as sharp as should be because trains shake even solid ground!

 

[annnewjerz]

Very nice, never thought of stacking filters. How many extra stops will a polarizing filter give you when stacked on your neutral density filter?

I haven't found a use for my NDx400 filter yet (used it on some water once), but am hoping to get creative with it on our trip to The World in December for some shots of the rides, the railroad, the monorail, etc.

 

[zackiedawg]

It's fun, isn't it! I am looking forward to playing with mine more - admittedly for me it tends to be a seasonal toy - with winter being that season. Standing around outside with a tripod in the middle of the hot, humid afternoon sun taking 20-30 second exposures just isn't too high on my list. So mine's been sitting a while. As it cools down, I start playing with it more.

Another thing that can be fun to use it for is to pan and track with the train, so you get background motion blur with a sharper train...it's a nice effect that often slow-moving trains don't give you the opportunity to shoot that way. But if the shutter can be stretched out 1-2 seconds, and you pan with the train, you may get some really cool effects.

Ann, the filter is lots of fun for a few different things. One is to make ghost people - or blur the crowds...to give the appearance of busyness and rush. Another would be to get that blurry traffic effect from a freeway overpass, that usually you only see at night. Another still is to get real long shutter speeds by stopping down and stacking filters, so you can completely eliminate people from architecture and landscape shots where they would spoil the shot - as long as they're in motion, they basically won't show up (or will be so ghosted that they'll not be identifiable). Even just taking a slow exposure shot at ISO100 in nice daylight with no moving subjects in the frame can be fun - the colors and saturation come out so differently, and shadows expose better, that it can add a very rich, almost HDR quality to a standard snapshot scene. Just a few ideas!

 

[boBQuincy]

It's fun, isn't it! I am looking forward to playing with mine more - admittedly for me it tends to be a seasonal toy - with winter being that season. Standing around outside with a tripod in the middle of the hot, humid afternoon sun taking 20-30 second exposures just isn't too high on my list. ...

... - the colors and saturation come out so differently, and shadows expose better, that it can add a very rich, almost HDR quality to a standard snapshot scene. Just a few ideas!

Cooler weather sounds good! It was over 90, sunny, and humid here in central NC! The trains were running on about a 30 minute schedule so there was a lot of standing around and waiting.

The colors and saturation do get exaggerated with this technique, it's interesting. The red railing in the lower left of one photo was *so* red that I had to tone it down so it wasn't the focal point of the photo!

Anyway, this is good practice for WDW and now I have some ideas of settings for: monorails, trains, buses, parades...

 

[jann1033]

i like the last 2 best but interesting idea in general

 

[annnewjerz]

Ann, the filter is lots of fun for a few different things. One is to make ghost people - or blur the crowds...to give the appearance of busyness and rush. Another would be to get that blurry traffic effect from a freeway overpass, that usually you only see at night. Another still is to get real long shutter speeds by stopping down and stacking filters, so you can completely eliminate people from architecture and landscape shots where they would spoil the shot - as long as they're in motion, they basically won't show up (or will be so ghosted that they'll not be identifiable). Even just taking a slow exposure shot at ISO100 in nice daylight with no moving subjects in the frame can be fun - the colors and saturation come out so differently, and shadows expose better, that it can add a very rich, almost HDR quality to a standard snapshot scene. Just a few ideas!

Thanks for the ideas---never thought of trying to eliminate people completely (although I do vaguely remember you doing this with the line in front of HM under the canopy, right??). Your shot of all the "ghosts" on Main Street with the Castle in the background was the first time I ever heard of an NDx400 filter and the reason I considered buying one. Now if only I would have spent the extra money and gotten the 77mm size, it'd be perfect.

 

[zackiedawg]

That's alright...I'm still milking my 6 year old ND400 with 58mm thread - I bought a 49mm to 58mm step up ring to use it with my 50mm F1.7 lens, then bought a 62mm to 58mm step down ring to use it with my 18-250mm lens (due to vignetting, I can only use it from about 27mm to 250mm). I can also use the same step-down ring for the Sigma 30mm F1.4, but would have to crop some heavy vignetting - probably down to about 80% of the original frame - it still may be worth it, so I may try a few samples. I think a 77mm step down ring would be a ton of vignetting, so tons of cropping would be needed - probably not worth it. But if you have any lenses that are threaded within 4-6mm of your ND400 filter, step-up and step-down rings are super-cheap and can expand the versatility of the ND400.

 

[ElizK]

Actually, I guess the question applies to ANY type of filter... Is there any real reason for me to by the $30-$119.00 ones that the camera store sells over the $8.00 one I can find on ebay? Thanks!

 

[EnnEss]

Filters are like lenses, there are good ones, bad ones, etc. Look into the filters you buy, much like the lenses, or anything else really, cars, houses, etc etc.

 

[bob100]

Actually, I guess the question applies to ANY type of filter... Is there any real reason for me to by the $30-$119.00 ones that the camera store sells over the $8.00 one I can find on ebay? Thanks!

yes, the $8 ebay polarizing filters don't eliminate reflected light (although they will help you get a bluer sky) also the cheaper polarizing filter can affect the "auto focus" function