Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Newbie Help (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/newbie-help-16/)
-   -   Filters question - skylight vs. UV vs. polarizer... ??? (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/newbie-help-16/filters-question-skylight-vs-uv-vs-polarizer-28590/)

Kat Jul 2, 2004 1:08 PM

Do you need all three? What is the difference in picture outcome?

I'm taking my Kodak 6490 to Florida (Disney and beach). I want to enhance the natural color of sky and water instead of gettingthe usual "bleached" sky and water glare that Igot with my old 35mm point/shoot.B&Hphoto has thelens adapter in stock for the 6490 so I'm ready to get it and a filter (or two).What all do I really need??:?

Thanks, Kat

Jul 2, 2004 1:29 PM

Kat wrote:
Quote:

Do you need all three? What is the difference in picture outcome?

I'm taking my Kodak 6490 to Florida (Disney and beach). I want to enhance the natural color of sky and water instead of gettingthe usual "bleached" sky and water glare that Igot with my old 35mm point/shoot.B&Hphoto has thelens adapter in stock for the 6490 so I'm ready to get it and a filter (or two).What all do I really need??:?

Thanks, Kat
The polarizer should give you what you want.With a circular polarizer, you can turn the filter to enhance colors, reduce reflections, etc. The skylight & UV filters are very limited in the amount of UV filtering they actually accomplish (most people only use them as lens "guards"...it's better to crack a filter than the front element of the lens).

slipe Jul 2, 2004 2:47 PM


You don't need a circular polarizer for that camera. They are needed for SLR type cameras that use a split beam to focus. Linear polarizers are less expensive and I have read have a little more effect – although I don't believe everything I read. Linear polarizers work the same way as the circular ones in that you rotate them for best effect.

Polarized sunglasses are always polarized to filter polarized light in the horizontal. Use some polarized glasses and turn your polarizer until everything is dark. Make marks at the 90 degree points and put one of the marks straight up on the camera. That will give you the best polarization in most circumstances. You can make minor adjustments from there, but you will find you don't get much change from having the mark straight up. Both reflections and polarized white light from the sky are usually polarized almost perfectly horizontally.

If you wear polarized glasses when you shoot you can just tilt your head slightly to see if there is any improvement. If there is move the mark the same way.

A strong skylight or haze filter can be handy but not necessary. You will not notice the difference with a UV filter.

Jul 2, 2004 3:35 PM

Everybody has an opinion...or you can believe what Kodak recomends for that camera model themselves here: http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQueri...q-locale=en_US

"Add drama to your DX6490 pictures. Make fair-weather clouds pop, intensify the colors of lakes, trees, and flowers. Reduce reflections from windows and water so you can see through them.



Simply attach the B&W Circular Polarizer to your 55 mm lens adapter and rotate it for the desired effect. This circular polarizer works with the auto-exposure and auto-focus systems of your DX6490."

slipe Jul 2, 2004 5:17 PM


I can't argue with your statement that you can't go wrong with the manufacturer's recommended equipment. For one thing you won't get one too thick and end up with vignetting at wide angles.

But I don't see that Kodak makes a linear polarizer and they are going to sell what they have. I have 4 digital cameras and linear polarizers work with all of them. It is possible that Kodak cameras are unique, but I doubt it. Only some DSLRs need circular polarizers.

There is a big difference in cost between the Kodak circular at $70 and the Hoya linear at $17:
http://www.digitalfotoclub.com/sc/ma...ate=07_01_2004 The Hoya looks to also be thin. You can get a Tiffin for about the same price.

This is a good discussion:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=9271851

Jul 2, 2004 9:53 PM

I can produce another 4 arguments against your's but I'll just concede that you are much more astute at "measurebating".

slipe Jul 3, 2004 11:45 AM

Kalypso wrote:
Quote:

I can produce another 4 arguments against your's but I'll just concede that you are much more astute at "measurebating".

Since Kat is considering a polarizer I think your 4 points would be of interest. I don't doubt there might be good reason to pay $70 rather than $17 for a polarizer. From my limited knowledge base the Hoya or Tiffin linear polarizer would be at least as good, and possibly better.

I'm not sure what "measurebating" is, but it sounds like you get abusive and sulk off if everyone doesn't agree with you 100%. That is a poor approach IMO when someone is seeking information. How about posting your 4 points so Kat has better information to make a decision on.

Jul 3, 2004 10:31 PM

slipe wrote:
Quote:

Since Kat is considering a polarizer I think your 4 points would be of interest. I don't doubt there might be good reason to pay $70 rather than $17 for a polarizer. From my limited knowledge base the Hoya or Tiffin linear polarizer would be at least as good, and possibly better.

I'm not sure what "measurebating" is, but it sounds like you get abusive and sulk off if everyone doesn't agree with you 100%. That is a poor approach IMO when someone is seeking information. How about posting your 4 points so Kat has better information to make a decision on.

I never said the Kodak's, B&W Brand of polarizer was what she needed...just the type of polarizer (which you seem to think is wrong so you keep defending your "linear" thinking). I use Tiffen filters with great success & recommend them to everyone that asks.

As far as being "informative"...you were the one that waded in spouting inaccurate information like this:

"You don't need a circular polarizer for that camera. They are needed for SLR type cameras that use a split beam to focus. Linear polarizers are less expensive and I have read have a little more effect – although I don't believe everything I read. Linear polarizers work the same way as the circular ones in that you rotate them for best effect."

Does that sound like informativefacts to someone with a question about a polarizer for her particular camera? Evenwhen that camera model is one the manufacturer recommends a Circular Polarizer for?

Circular polarizers were developed for SLR's with auto-focus capabilities and will work with all cameras...digital, auto& manual SLR's. Here's a fact: Linear polarizers were developed for manual focus cameras.

If you think me statingaccurate informationis "abusive", I think you need to rethink your own reasons for posting. From this one encounter, yourgoal seems tobe somethingthat requires you to prove someone wrong. With the number of posts you've managed on this forum, I wish you good luck.

Baz Jul 4, 2004 6:10 AM

I dont wish to be involed with any arguments here. But like Slipe I had been advised that for my Fuji S602 camera, a linear polariser filter would be suitable.

And so I purchased one. After many years of using film SLR's with polarising filters, I find the result with a linear filter on the S602 lacking. I dont see much difference when rotating the filter compared with earlier SLR filters. The SLR filter I had made an amazing difference.

Is this because of a difference between circular or linear ? News to me. In the days of film SLR's there was only ONE polarising filter, and it worked!





ferny Jul 4, 2004 3:57 PM

KAt, here is a great (pdf) article about polarizers.

http://www.popphoto.com/pdfs/2002/0902/Polarizer.pdf


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:13 PM.