Zeiss Biogion 21/2.8 or 25/2.8 and polarizer filter with M9?

[redwine1980]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi guys,

 

anyone tried using the PL filters or any polar.filter solution with Biogons 21/2.8 or 25/2.8 and M9?

I've read here some threads reg. the red left side on 21/2.8 (some looked to be caused by UV filters, so wondering about PL). What about PLs? Any experience out there?

 

Or any other lower budget cost wide lens solution with PL?

Thanks!

[jaapv]

UV filters and polarizers don't produce a cast. That is just with UV/IR filters.

[lars_bergquist]

With a lens with a very wide angle of view, a polarizer won't produce an even effect because it is angle dependent, and the amount of polarized light will differ across the image field. Using a polarizer on any lens shorter than 35mm is quite tricky.

 

The old man from the Age of Swing-In Polarizers

[AlanJW]

Yes, using polarizer on wide angle is tricky but I have gotten some very good (interesting) shots with a polarizer and the WATE. It depends on the scene. For darkening blue skies, it works but I am not convinced it is any better than what you can do in post processing. However, the polarizer -- even at wide angles -- is still superior dealing with reflections.

[redwine1980]

Yes, using polarizer on wide angle is tricky but I have gotten some very good (interesting) shots with a polarizer and the WATE. It depends on the scene. For darkening blue skies, it works but I am not convinced it is any better than what you can do in post processing. However, the polarizer -- even at wide angles -- is still superior dealing with reflections.

 

Hmm...I am currently on FF, 1DsII with ordered M9. I am used for Polarizer with 17mm and similar lenses on FF. Is there any real life difference with M9?

[thrice]

Hmm...I am currently on FF, 1DsII with ordered M9. I am used for Polarizer with 17mm and similar lenses on FF. Is there any real life difference with M9?

 

You can use a linear polarizer with the M9 which means slightly more effective polarization, better light transmission, and cheaper filters

[lars_bergquist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmm...I am currently on FF, 1DsII with ordered M9. I am used for Polarizer with 17mm and similar lenses on FF. Is there any real life difference with M9?

Let's use as an example the darkening of a blue sky. As you know, the effect is greatest when the camera is aimed in a direction that is ninety degrees from the position of the sun in the sky. Aim it at 45°, and the effect will be appreciably less. But your 17mm lens has a horizontal coverage of 90°. This means that if you aim the lens for maximum effect in the center of the image -- i.e. with the optical axis pointing at that point 90° from the sun -- then the sky at one edge of the picture will be 45° from the sun, while that at the other edge will be 135° from it. So the darkening effect will be strong in the middle of the image, falling off strongly towards he edges. You can check this yourself on the next clear day. So PP may well be the best bet in a case like this.

 

The effect will be similar with reflexes, and is similarly obvious. This does not mean that you cannot use the polarizer with your 17mm lens, or a 21 or whatever -- you decide if the result pleases you -- but even it will not be.

 

The old man from the Age of the Yellow Filter.

[redwine1980]

Let's use as an example the darkening of a blue sky. As you know, the effect is greatest when the camera is aimed in a direction that is ninety degrees from the position of the sun in the sky. Aim it at 45°, and the effect will be appreciably less. But your 17mm lens has a horizontal coverage of 90°. This means that if you aim the lens for maximum effect in the center of the image -- i.e. with the optical axis pointing at that point 90° from the sun -- then the sky at one edge of the picture will be 45° from the sun, while that at the other edge will be 135° from it. So the darkening effect will be strong in the middle of the image, falling off strongly towards he edges. You can check this yourself on the next clear day. So PP may well be the best bet in a case like this.

 

The effect will be similar with reflexes, and is similarly obvious. This does not mean that you cannot use the polarizer with your 17mm lens, or a 21 or whatever -- you decide if the result pleases you -- but even it will not be.

 

The old man from the Age of the Yellow Filter.

 

Thx, I am aware about this.. Man just has to be a bit careful when shooting wide with PL. So in the conclusion, I understand it that there's no real difference in shooting PL with Nikon/Canon FF and M9.

 

I was most curious about the reds - thx a lot for info!