Polarizing Lens Question

[bohaiboy]

So I have a 77mm BW polarizing lens for my 24-105 and 100-300 L lenses EOS 5d Mark III
My questions:

1) Should I be able to tell a marked difference thru the viewfinder as I rotate the lens or will it be subtle?
2) Is there a trick to keeping the lens from becoming "sticky" as I rotate it and also any tricks to be able to take it off more easily?

I use a Canon UV Haze as my first line of defense. Does taht make a difference with thepolarized lens?

 

[beforeEos Camaras]

yes you will see a difference also take off the uv filter first after a few times removal will be easier as well

 

[Zeidora]

Strength of effect depends on angle of light source (sun) to where you direct your camera at. Straight into sun or directly away from it, there is very little effect for darkening sky. At 90 degrees you get maximum effect of pol filter. If you are looking at removing reflections from glass, you should see an effect immediately.

Maximum and minimum effect of polarizer in same shot are at 90 degree rotation of filter.

Re sticky, that tends to happen a bit, but I would consider it a plus because the filter will not change position by itself. Re taking off, keep the filter threads clean. With cheaper filters/lenses (not the case with B&W and L-glass) the cheaper metals may cause problems.

 

[Bernd Stuht]

Another Question about Polarizer´s:

What is the Difference between linear and circular ?

30j ago i haven´t got a circular - and used a linear - what was also not correct for the TTL-Measuring System.
With this Filters i could notice the "ND" Effekt while holding this Filters added and turned one 90° opposite to the
other - also i used Polarizing Filter´s with Flash - and it has to adjusted so the Filter on the Flash looks dark while
viewed throught the viewfinder and holded an Mirror to see the Flashfilter.

A small Test Yesterday with two B&W Circular showed me an Effekt of Colorvariation - like wrong White Balance 8) .

If the Light is filtered by a Polarizer - and a linear "filter´s out" one type of "waving/directed" Light - how does circular
become the same Effekt using in Photografics ?

Only a Question about the physics - i want to knew it : ( and eventually use again polarized Flashlights )

Greetings

Bernd

 

[Zeidora]

Circular pol = linear + lamda quarter plate. Indecent ray gets split into two component at 90 degree angle and one ray is retarded by quarter wavelength. Then the two are recombined 90 degree out of phase which caused the resultant ray to have a rotating e-vector. E-vectors of all light rays are randomly distributed, which is necessary for camera light meters to work properly, because light meters are behind semi-transparent mirror, which are polarizers themselves. If you hit polarizer with light at a particular e-vector, intensity measured behind polarizer will vary with angle of incident e-vector, not light intensity of incident beam, leading to wrong intensity measure = wrong exposure.

All clear?

 

[Bernd Stuht]

All clear?

70% Clear, i translated it from english to German ( in my Brain and with some Google - while "Indecent" was translated in a funny
result - but i knew ho to interpret it in the Topic )

Because of the polarizing Element in the Lightmeter it´s logical not to use linear Polarizers.

And the Output of an circular Pol. isn´t straigt polarized anymore, so the second Filter does/could not block mostly all of the
"unwanted" Rays.

The reduced rays are reduced by the out of Phase of the retarding by a quarter Wavelength and recombining it ?
( It sounds like electromagnic Laws of reducing Amplitude with combine it with an inverted Phase )

I have to read your Text several Time´s with enough Coffee - and play with the variation of the Order :

circular-circular - no massive Light fall off while the Filters are set 90° opposite
linear-linear - massive Light fall off while the Filters are set 90° opposite
linear-circular - massive Light fall off while the Filters are set 90° opposite
circular-linear - no massive Light fall off while the Filters are set 90° opposite

The Effekt in photografics so is the same in reducing "chaotic reflected" Waves ( Colors ) and reflections on non Metal Surfaces.

Also i should take a Look through the Viewfinder with my polarized Sunglasses - in the Past with linear Filter it was´nt an good
Idea - so i don´t tryed it in the Past anymore.

Thanks for your Info !

Bernd

 

[Zeidora]

Funny re translation. I learned about it in a class in scientific photography in the department of physical chemistry at the University of Basel, in German, naturally! So I translated my German background to English.

Indecent, yep typo, should have read incident.

For cross-polarization to work, I think you need at least one linear polarizers. That makes sense. Not sure what the variable ND filters use, which are in essence just cross polarizers. It could well be lin-circ combo, so that the light rays coming out of it are circ polarized and then meter still works.

In circ pol, you eliminate rays from unwanted direction by the linear polarizer portion of the sandwich. After the rays have passed the linear part, they hit the lambda quarter plate. This makes the remaining ray's e-vector rotate around their axis.

Cross polarization can be used to eliminate hot-spots on metal surfaces. Did that recently with metal harpsichord (= Cembalo in German) strings under microscope with polarizers on fibre optics light source and then a second (analyzer) on lens.

 

[bluenoser1993]

1) Should I be able to tell a marked difference thru the viewfinder as I rotate the lens or will it be subtle?

If I'm shooting something with the the sun only slightly to the right of frame, for example, and I'm having a hard time adjusting the CPL for max affect looking through the view finder, I'll turn to the left until the sun is at about 90 degrees to the right and adjust the CPL. At 90 it is easy to get the max setting looking at sky/clouds, then I'll go back to the intended frame and hopefully I'm getting the most out of the limited affect from the filter.

I might be fooling myself, but that is how I've tried to deal with situations like that.

 

[jthomson]

When I quickly read the title I thought you might be trying to start another Canon vs Nikon debate. 8)