Poloriser ..... but for which lens

  • Thread starter Thread starter RobbieW
  • Start date Start date
R

RobbieW

Guest
Hi

After seeing various photo's which have been taken with Polorisers, I have decided that I would like one.

I currently have a Sigma 17-70mm which I use for landscapes and as an all purpose lens, I am going to treat myself to a sigma 10-20mm next month purely for landscapes.

My question is which lens would I get most use of of with the polorisers? The 17-70mm is a 72mm lens, and the 10-20mm is a 77mm filter, I can't afford to buy 2 filters so was wondering which size filter to buy.

Hope that makes sense, any advice is very welcome.

Thanks

Rob
 
Im pretty sure you will have to buy two separate Filters, 72mm and 77mm.

Dont take my word for it though im abit of a noob to all this lol
 
If you got a 77mm and then a 77 > 72mm stepdown ring I wonder would you get vignetting. Since the smaller only only has to go to 17mm...
 
Definitely go for the larger filter. Absolutely no need to get both - I have the same gear and it doesn't vignette at 17mm - and obviously using a 72mm filter on your wiiiide 10-20 would be ludicrous :nono: The only pain is swapping filters over as well as the lens :shrug:

HTH :)
 
Just to be awkward:

The 10-20 has such a monstrous viewing angle that it will, inevitably and on occasion, flare. Unless you get a really, really good (read EXPENSIVE MULTI-COATED) polariser the flare will be magnified along with ghosting and contrast drop-outs.

Just how much do you use the 17-70? You may find the 10-20 too wide for some landscape and that you're using your 17-70 more. I hope you bought a tripod as the 10-20 is slow already and you're going to add another few stops to it :)

Also, are you going to be getting more 77mm lenses or more 72mm lenses in the future? From the currently available Canon range, 12 are 72mm and 14 are 77mm – most of the 77’s are in the L range. 49 are 58mm :shrug:
 
Jonnyreb said:

Also, are you going to be getting more 77mm lenses or more 72mm lenses in the future? From the currently available Canon range, 12 are 72mm and 14 are 77mm – most of the 77’s are in the L range. 49 are 58mm :shrug:
Click to expand...

Did you know that off the top of your head? :clap:

Once I have bought my 10-20mm thats it for a while, although as you know the want list is bound to increase. I am starting to wonder if one for a 72mm would be better, as I think that lens may be used a little more for water type pics.
 
77mm is a common size on all my Canon lenses so could be a safer bet for the future too.
 
rwotton said:
Did you know that off the top of your head? :clap:
Click to expand...

If only i could count cards :D

RobertP - I can see your point, but 77mm tends to be the preserve of larger pro / sumer lenses. The L primes from 35 - 85mm are 72mm and the zooms 77mm. By far any away the most common in 58mm from primes all the way through to consumer zooms. I sincerely doubt that Canon will produce consumer lenses at 77mm - they require far too much glass!

PS - your 50mm 1.4 is 58mm :D
 
...or go the Cokin p holder and filter route, you'll only need the cheap adaptor rings then
 
But for a circular polariser? Thought they were screwins.

I'd go for the 77mm and a couple of quid for a stepdown ring ;)
 
deffo get the bigger then step down then upgrade if you start using the 10-20mm more.

I am lucky here in that all the lenses i have that require it are 77mm.

Just get the best you one you can i have Hoya pro1 , the difference in quililty between it and the cheaper stuff like Jessops is very noticeable (which i did use on my old sigma 50-500mm)
 
lol Nice.

I new knew that about the Cokin one. So how does it fit into the square holder?

Call me thick, lol, but the polariser is a circle, and the holder is a square, and through my extensive experience of teaching my 3 yr old not to hammer the circular shape into the square hole, I kinda figure theyre two different shapes...:D
 
Marcel said:
lol Nice.

I new knew that about the Cokin one. So how does it fit into the square holder?

Call me thick, lol, but the polariser is a circle, and the holder is a square, and through my extensive experience of teaching my 3 yr old not to hammer the circular shape into the square hole, I kinda figure theyre two different shapes...:D
Click to expand...

It drops into the very back Marcel - before the 1st 'square' holder. I find it very faffy though as you have to try to flick it around with your finger nail (tricky on a long lens) whilst keeping eye to viewfinder and finger on preview button, so I'll be getting a 77mm screw-in.

The choice is easy for me as the lenses i use most are 77mm.
 
Jonnyreb said:
It drops into the very back Marcel - before the 1st 'square' holder. I find it very faffy though as you have to try to flick it around with your finger nail (tricky on a long lens) whilst keeping eye to viewfinder and finger on preview button, so I'll be getting a 77mm screw-in.

The choice is easy for me as the lenses i use most are 77mm.
Click to expand...

I think with the Cokin Z-pro and some of the Lee holders, you can get a square CPL, and the holder spins instead.
 
Ahhh that would be an idea, because the Cokin holder spins anyway doesnt it?
 
That is does - but with the P sized one its a little on the narrow size.:lol:

By the time you've forked out for the larger glass in the pro-sized ones you may as well have bought a 77mm screw in :D
 
For my two-pennies...

I have a 12-24 Nikon and near its widest the angle is so great the polariser's effects only appear part way across the image. This isn't a problem with water shots, but where the sun is 90-degrees to one side, the blue sky can look stupidly blue on one side and have hardly any effect of the other, so it looks 'obviously polarised' which I don't like.

That said, polas are great for longer lenses IMO where their effect is even and pleasing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top