polarized filters whats the difference? nikon vs $10 one

[Provo]

What is the difference between 52mm Circular Polarizer II Filter part 2233 $65 opposed to the Sunpak 52mm Circular Polarized Filter that sells for $10

I am a bit confused on this

 

[MrRamonG]

I think the difference in price is because one is coated and one is not.

 

[KmH]

What is the difference between 52mm Circular Polarizer II Filter part 2233 $65 opposed to the Sunpak 52mm Circular Polarized Filter that sells for $10

I am a bit confused on this

Image quality is the difference and $65 is still pretty cheap for a CPL filter. Here's a good one. Better would be the Singh-Ray brand.

There are also filter holders that attach to your lens that hold 4x6 inch filters rather than screw-on filters.

 

[Provo]

What is the difference between 52mm Circular Polarizer II Filter part 2233 $65 opposed to the Sunpak 52mm Circular Polarized Filter that sells for $10

I am a bit confused on this

Image quality is the difference and $65 is still pretty cheap for a CPL filter. Here's a good one. Better would be the Singh-Ray brand.

There are also filter holders that attach to your lens that hold 4x6 inch filters rather than screw-on filters.

Thank you both for the input do you think the singh-ray brand would fit both the standard lens that came with the camera as well as the 55-200mm

 

[PatrickHMS]

What is the difference between 52mm Circular Polarizer II Filter part 2233 $65 opposed to the Sunpak 52mm Circular Polarized Filter that sells for $10

I am a bit confused on this

Image quality is the difference and $65 is still pretty cheap for a CPL filter. Here's a good one. Better would be the Singh-Ray brand.

There are also filter holders that attach to your lens that hold 4x6 inch filters rather than screw-on filters.

Thank you both for the input do you think the singh-ray brand would fit both the standard lens that came with the camera as well as the 55-200mm

For whatever filter size you are using, it will fit any other lens the same size.

For Nikon, both the 18-55mm and the 55-200mm are both 52mm, so one filter would fit both lenses.

 

[Provo]

Well I ordered the B+W filter thanks for the tip & I read some reviews on the filter and what Kaeseman means. I ordered it from the BH photostore

I also went to a store in Princeton NJ and purchased a giotto rocket blower and 2 marumi uv filter but I got ripped a new one on the price of the filters each where $49 a piece the same ones I found online ebay and andorama for like $9-15 but too late all sales final oh well looks like I will not be going back to that store again.

anyway thanks again

 

[benhasajeep]

Well I ordered the B+W filter thanks for the tip & I read some reviews on the filter and what Kaeseman means. I ordered it from the BH photostore

I also went to a store in Princeton NJ and purchased a giotto rocket blower and 2 marumi uv filter but I got ripped a new one on the price of the filters each where $49 a piece the same ones I found online ebay and andorama for like $9-15 but too late all sales final oh well looks like I will not be going back to that store again.

anyway thanks again

Good choice on the B+W filter, you will not be dissapointed.

I would be highly be suspect of ANY store that says all sales are final that sold new merchandise. I can understand maybe on electronics (which I don't agree with) but not things like filters and tripods and normal stuff where opening the box really doesn't matter.

 

[KmH]

Well I ordered the B+W filter thanks for the tip & I read some reviews on the filter and what Kaeseman means. I ordered it from the BH photostore

I also went to a store in Princeton NJ and purchased a giotto rocket blower and 2 marumi uv filter but I got ripped a new one on the price of the filters each where $49 a piece the same ones I found online ebay and andorama for like $9-15 but too late all sales final oh well looks like I will not be going back to that store again.

anyway thanks again

The UV filters, imo, were a waste of money. Many photographers use them to 'protect' the front of their lens. On a digital camera they serve no other useful purpose, and with careful camera handeling serve no useful 'protection' function either.

 

[Provo]

Well I ordered the B+W filter thanks for the tip & I read some reviews on the filter and what Kaeseman means. I ordered it from the BH photostore

I also went to a store in Princeton NJ and purchased a giotto rocket blower and 2 marumi uv filter but I got ripped a new one on the price of the filters each where $49 a piece the same ones I found online ebay and andorama for like $9-15 but too late all sales final oh well looks like I will not be going back to that store again.

anyway thanks again

The UV filters, imo, were a waste of money. Many photographers use them to 'protect' the front of their lens. On a digital camera they serve no other useful purpose, and with careful camera handeling serve no useful 'protection' function either.

I got it just for protection,I know it did not serve any other purpose it does give me a piece of mind because it is a screw on type and being that I will be taking pictures at the beach and such I rather have sand hit the filter directly then no filter at all and make direct impact with the lens.

 

[tirediron]

I got it just for protection...

If you're going to use it just for protection (Which is all it's good for) then I would suggest getting a good quality clear glass filter. It's relatively inexpensive and will have significantly less impact on your images than a mediocre (at best) quality UV filter.

 

[Victor_TO]

Hi to everyone from a newbie just joined today.

I got a very old 58 mm polarized filter made by KENKO model PL. It is very sticky, hard to turn/rotate.
Would you let me know how to clean it or make it less sticky so when I put it on the lenses I can rotate it more easily.
TIA,

 

[KmH]

Well I ordered the B+W filter thanks for the tip & I read some reviews on the filter and what Kaeseman means. I ordered it from the BH photostore

I also went to a store in Princeton NJ and purchased a giotto rocket blower and 2 marumi uv filter but I got ripped a new one on the price of the filters each where $49 a piece the same ones I found online ebay and andorama for like $9-15 but too late all sales final oh well looks like I will not be going back to that store again.

anyway thanks again

The UV filters, imo, were a waste of money. Many photographers use them to 'protect' the front of their lens. On a digital camera they serve no other useful purpose, and with careful camera handeling serve no useful 'protection' function either.

I got it just for protection,I know it did not serve any other purpose it does give me a piece of mind because it is a screw on type and being that I will be taking pictures at the beach and such I rather have sand hit the filter directly then no filter at all and make direct impact with the lens.

Edit; OK.

 

[jbylake]

I haven't read where anyone mentioned that the quality of the glass used, has any affect on the quality of the filter.

Second, I disagree with anyone who says UV lenses are worthless, except for lens protection. They are great for excess glare, in conditions where you can't control it otherwise.

Example, I'll shoot into a stream of trout with a UV filter. You shoot into it with nothing. Let's see if there is a difference.

J.

 

[Montana]

I have never seen a UV do anything for glare....do you mean a circular polarizer?

 

[KmH]

I haven't read where anyone mentioned that the quality of the glass used, has any affect on the quality of the filter.

Second, I disagree with anyone who says UV lenses are worthless, except for lens protection. They are great for excess glare, in conditions where you can't control it otherwise.

Example, I'll shoot into a stream of trout with a UV filter. You shoot into it with nothing. Let's see if there is a difference.

J.

That's what a circular polarizing filter (CPL) does, not a UV.

Every digital camera has a UV filter (among others) in front of the image sensor, that's why they don't need one on the lens.