polarizing filters

[Neilmac50]

I want to purchase a 77mm circular polarizing filter for use in landscape photography here in South Africa,it needs to be good quality to be used in conjunction with my Nikon D3s, Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 and Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses.It will probably have to be a slim profile for the wider end of the 24-70 lens, I may get my brother in the UK to buy it for me and post out, does anyone have any recommendations please? Neil

[Manfred M]

Have a look at the B+W line, especially at their Käsemann line; slim profile and sealed for more tropical climates. Polarizers are sandwich construction and if they are not sealed, one can get fungus growth between the layers. B+W also use brass, rather than aluminum mounts, which are less likely to bind.

Get a anti-reflection coated filter as well (B+W has a number of different quality levels - I have one of their MRC (multi-resistant coated Käsemann ones). I have both of the lenses you have and with the f/2.8 24-70mm at / near 24mm, you will get a bit of vignetting if you don't have the slimline. The only downside with this design is that the Nikon lens cap does not fit it. It ships with a lens cap, but it is not as good as the Nikon ones. I prefer non-slimlines because they tend to be a bit easier to grasp, but the tradeoff is vignetting if I use them on the 24-70mm. I find that I can use the Nikon lens caps on these though.

Another filter manufacturer that puts out high end polarizers is another German filter maker; Heliopan. I don't have anything that is slimline from them. I also have polarizers from Sigma and Tiffen; both use aluminum mounts and the build quality is good, but not up to the standards of Heliopan or B+W.

[Polar01]

I have to agree with Manfred, I have the B+W 77mm F-Pro MRC polarizer and am very happy with it. I did have a Tiffen which worked great, however as it has an aluminum ring I found that it often bound to the front the lens, thus was a pain to remove. I ended up having to destroy it to get it off my Nikon 80-400mm lens.

Cheers: Allan

[DanK]

You can save money and buy a Marumi. At least here in the US, they are far cheaper than B+W, even a bit cheaper than the mid-level brands, and in one test, they performed identically to the B+W Slim KSM C-POL MRC 72 mm. After reading that review, I switched brands and now mostly buy Marumi filters. I have been entirely satisfied. However, I do agree that an aluminum frame, particularly in a slim-profile filter, requires that you be careful in screwing the filter in and that you don't overtighten. If you are careful, they are fine--I haven't had any filter seriously stuck for several years.

[Neilmac50]

Thanks for your quick replies, I like the sounds of the B&W MRC coated XS Pro filters,not cheap but then why stick a cheap filter in front of an expensive lens anyway.Thanks again for pointing me in the right direction,don't think they are available over here so will get my brother to post me one from England.

[Inkanyezi]

Cheap filters aren't necessarily bad, and expensive will not warrant better quality. Most polarisers are not AR-coated. The reason is simple. The filter is made of resin, and the coating process utilises heat that would destroy the filter. To coat it, the glass has to be coated on one side before bonding to the resin, and this is more complicated, thus more expensive, than doing it for other filters.

Of course it is better to have one that is coated. The uncoated ones are in the market because most people won't pay for better quality.

Mirror-free systems or compact cameras do not need a circular polariser (CPL), but they are needed for DSLR and SLT cameras for AF and light measuring to function well. They evolved long ago because beam splitters in cinematographic cameras deviate polarised light to the viewfinder.