 Tom R. Fleeman |
Polarizing Filter I had a UV filter on my camera and shot 35 images that came out OK. I then added a polarizing filter, and all the rest of about 800 shots of baseball game were soft out out of focus. Should I have only used the polarizer without the UV filter still on camera?? Thanks.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
It might be that you actually should have not used the polarizer at all, if you were trying to use auto focus. There's a linear polarized filter and a circular polarized filter. The circular allows the use of auto focus. And it could also be that having more than one filter got in the way of your auto focus, if that's what you used. Or the polarizer could be of low quality optically, causing fuzzy images.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Hi Tom, Greg is correct and another point I would like to make is the quality of filters used. I have all L glass and placing a $40 UV filter in front of a $2000 lens that will most likely degrade sharpness and image quality doesn't make sense to me. I use B+W filters which are a bit pricey but they are very good quality and cheaper than the Singh Ray filters. I only use UV filters when it is hazy out and circular polarizers when shooting landscape images of dark scenes and waterfalls. Otherwise, I don't use them at all - not even for protection as I always have either a lens cap on while walking around or lens hood attached when shooting. Hope this helps.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Tom R. Fleeman |
Thanks for the response. I have an expensive lens also. I was hoping the polarizer would help with the glare from the sun at a baseball game I was shooting. I think the filter was $65. I was hoping it would help. I will try it by itself next time without the other filter. Thanks.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Hi Tom, I didn't actually answer your question but I would not stack filters and I suspected you were using quality lenses which is why I gave you the answer I did. My 77mm B+W Circular Polarizer runs about $175 but it is well worth it and it fits all my lenses. Someday I will belly up the $400+ for a Singh Ray :) Cheers.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Tom R. Fleeman |
Hi Carlton, When I get the chance I will try just the Polarizer and see what happens, not that in matters but I shoot with a Nikon D7000. I know you have to spend a little to get the quality, just tried to scrimp a litle. I just took a look at your gallery pretty nice , no Very nice. Well Thanks for the help I am sure we will talk again. Tom
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Randy A. Myers |
Other than checking to see if it's linear or circular, I would check to see if your shutter speed was too slow after adding the polarizer. A polarizer takes up two stops of light and if you weren't paying attention to that you may be seeing camera movement. Remember, your shutter speed needs to be at least 1 over the effective focal length of the lens. (Don't forget the multiplier if you're not shooting a full-frame camera.) I use Tiffen and Hoya and haven't had a problem. I rarely stack filters but I've never had it affect an image as you describe. Check your metadata. I think you will find the answer there.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Tom R. Fleeman |
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
|||||||||||
