Polarizers simplified?

I would like to get a 58-mm polarizing filter. I've read the threads on here and I've done quite a bit of googling and reading. I am confused by all the terminology -- warming, circular, gradient -- and all the reviews -- great, terrible, sturdy, falls apart.

I think the most expensive brands that I saw mentioned were Singh-Ray, B+W, Heliopan. Lower end brands were Tiffen and Hoya.

I really don't want to sacrifice image quality when I use a polarizing filter. I want to start out with a good one that I can use for a long time, if I can find a good one on a good sale.

Does anyone have any suggestions? And can anyone tell me if I probably need or don't need a warming, circular and/or gradient polarizing filter? I do or want to do everything except grand landscapes, and I live and shoot almost exclusively in Florida and Georgia and a bit in the Smoky Mountains of North Carolina.

As always, thank you so much.

I think what you are looking for is a circular polarizer. I've used B+W and Heliopan and both are excellent. Singh-Ray is also excellent. The cheaper brands can contribute a color cast to your image.

Not sure what you mean by "gradient polarizer". Sounds like you might be confusing graduated neutral density filters with polarizers. A polarizer only allows light through that is vibrating in one direction. Thus it really cuts down on glare and reflections (which is good for shooting in the Smokies!). A neutral density filter cuts down the amount of all light (doesn't polarize the light) so you can achieve longer shutter speeds. A graduated ND filter allows you to block light at one end of the filter but not the other (or in the center in the case of a reverse graduated neutral density). This is good for sunrise/sunset where you can reduce the amount of bright light coming into the camera relative to the darker foreground. It allows you to even out the light to something your sensor can deal with.

There are also warming and blue/gold polarizers (and others) but I would stay away from these unless you have a very specific application in mind as they will add a color cast to your image. A standard circular polarizer will let you adjust the amount of polarization letting you choose how much of a reflection to eliminate or how much to brighten a rainbow or add contrast to the sky, etc. I have a polarizer on every lens I own though I have to be mindful of its effect and sometimes I need to remove it if the effect is too much.

Get one and play around with it. They are a must have in your camera bag!

Here is a good introductory article.

Phillip, thank you so much!

Barbara, a circular polarizer is a wonderful tool to have in your photo kit. I happen to use Singh-Ray's circ polarizer and would certainly recommend it.

One thing to consider is the thread size of your largest lens (or lens you may buy in the future). Buy your circular polarizer in the largest thread size you think you will ever need and when you need to use it on smaller lenses you can buy an inexpensive step down ring that screws in between your lens and the circular polarizer. Step down rings come in a variety of sizes. That way you only need to carry one circular polarizer and still use it with smaller lenses.

Barbara, if you choose Singh Ray polarizers you can go with the Cokin P system and make one polarizer work with all of your lenses vs. buying a separate polarizer for each lens. By doing this you can also take advantage of using Singh Ray gradient neutral density filters.

Thanks, Wayne and Bill!

Phillip covered all the technical points, although I don't agree with keeping a polarizer on every lens or all the time.

With your growing set of lenses (55-250, macro, 400) you will likely have different filter size issues and you'll need to decide how to deal with that as Wayne explains. If you haven't checked already be prepared for a shock at the price of a high end circular polarizer in large size. You may decide that the limited amount of use you'll make of a polar on your bird lens doesn't justify the extra cost. In 40+ years of photography I don't think I've ever found a need for a polar on my longest/fattest lens. I miss the "golden days" of Nikon's product line when all my lenses from 20mm to 200mm all used the same 52mm set of filters and my single polarizer.

Barbara,

Just fyi, a "circular" polarizer is and has been required since the advent of auto focus lenses. It has to do with something about the ability for the auto focus to work with the cross-filtering and scattering of light with a polarizer. Prior to that, "Linear" polarizers were all that was available - and still are for non-AF lenses (like with my large format stuff.)

Aside from that, I wouldn't cast off Tiffen and Hoya as "lower end." Any of those you mentioned have been around a while and I would be comfortable with any - and in fact have most of those brands.


Re: warming or specialty polarizers, personally I don't think one needs those in this day and age, unless you have a specific need as has already been pointed out.

Lon

Thanks so much, Richard and Lon. I really appreciate all of the information.

RE warming polarizers - these date from the film era. Polaizers tend to filter out reds or yellows a bit more than blues. Not much but under the right conditions a scene may be slightly cooler than you remember it. Digital has largely negated this effect since the white balance will cover you and you'll never see it. Even with film today, the slightly cool cast can be very easily corrected in Photoshop before printing digitally. When we were making prints from slides in the wet darkroom, it was easier to correct for the cast in camera than with color correcting filters in the enlargner.

Short summary: Unless you have a specific reason for buying a warming polarizer, I wouldn't bother with it.

I have used Hoya polarizing filters (film and digital) forever and more recently, Singh Ray. SR filter are expensive (very). I do recommend for wide angle lenses, a thin mount ring (the ring that holds the glass in place, Hoya has them too) otherwise you may get vignetting (dark areas in the corners caused by the intrusion of the filter ring in the scene. As others have noted, a warming polarizer is not necessary these days. I think Wayne R had a good suggestion on step down rings.

Does anyone have any knowledge about any quality difference between these three?

Hoya 58mm Circular Polarizer HD Hardened Glass 8-layer Multi-Coated Filter - about $110
Hoya 58mm DMC PRO1 Digital Circular Polarizer Glass Filter - about $88
Hoya 58mm HRT Circular Polarizer Glass Filter - about $70

Thank you.

I use a Hoya DMC Pro-1 and have never had any problems with it at all.
$75 incl. shipping at Amazon.

I agree with with John. The Hoya filters I have now are the DMC Pro-1 (they are optimized for digital).

The main thing to look for (and the main reason for the price differences among the higher end filters) is the coatings on the glass. You'll often see terms like "multi-coated" or "super coated" or even the number of layers specified. These are good things.

The intent of the coatings is to improve transmission, and limit flare of all types. Adding filters can pretty easily create different kinds of flare. So in the Hoya case you gave

-- The bottom one (HRT) is considered "high transmission". All polarizers darken the scene 1-2 stops. The HRT one tries to minimize that. But it doesn't have all the fancy coatings, (though it might have some basic coating) so it's cheaper.
-- The middle one is a little older, and multi-coated, so it's a good quality filter.
-- The top one is (I think) Hoya's newest line, with all the most modern coatings they've got. Hence it's the most expensive.

Thanks very much, John, Eva and David. I'm getting closer! :)

I also use Hoya DMC PRO1. No problem. But I think B+W filters are a bit better in quality. I have some B+W filters but not CP.