aflundi Loc: Albuquerque, NM

How about just taking a picture with and without the filter, then compare the images. That should be an easy way for you to decided.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Cheap polarizing filters do not work as well as the expensive ones. You can get by using a mid-range price filter. The quality of coatings on the filter, I have been told is the difference in quality. I am one who owns a cheap Tiffen filter. $15.00. I Bought it from B&H. It works OK for me. For now. My next one may be a Breakthrough, or a better Tiffen.

CMH

1. I agree with Bob. Filters are part of the optical system. Why buy an expensive lens and then stick a cheapo filter in front. Hence my stock of B+W filters.
2. Within reason, good equipment is a lot cheaper than the cost of making the trip again to get pictures done the right way. I came to that conclusion years ago in the film age when shooting another roll was a lot less expensive than getting back to Yosemite.
3. Having good equipment means any failures are your fault. As the old cross country ski coach said, "Has not to do mit de vax. Has to do mit the technique." Only you can judge whether you need an equipment excuse.

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

Great suggestion.

MikieLBS Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"

I'm waiting for it to stop raining and the sun to pop out. I have a pond nearby for some test shots.

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

The Marumi's are very good and much cheaper than the high end, Hoyas, B+W's, etc.

MikieLBS Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"

Good advice. I make enough mistakes and don't need the added question if I cause it or the cheap equipment.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Using a 77-95mm adapter ring will be somewhat unwieldy - and no hood possible either - unless you buy a 95mm round metal and screw it into the polarizer ?? .....

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Use the filter.... You probably are seeing more image quality loss due to the "do-it-all" 28-300mm zoom lens, than you would to a lower quality C-Pol under most conditions.

Since it's probably an uncoated or single coated filter, be sure to use a lens hood. That will help.

But a high quality, multi-coated 77mm C-Pol isn't necessarily all that expensive, especially since you shouldn't need a pricier "slim" filter for that lens...

$73... B+W MRC C-Pol (8-layer coatings)
$79... Formatt Hitech Firecrest (slim)
$86... B+W F-Pro HT Kaesemann (16-layer Nano coatings)
$98... B+W XS-Pro HT Kaesemann (slim, 16-layer)
$99... Breakthrough X2
$129... Nikon C-Pol II
$135... Tiffen Digital HT Multi-Coated
$140... Marumi EXUS (slim)
$150... Hoya HD2 (8-layer coatings)
$154... Sigma WR (water repellent)
$156... Hoya EVO Antistatic
$200... Hoya HD3 (16-layer Nano coatings)
$200... Heliopan SH-PMC
$204... Rodenstock HR Digital
$210... Singh-Ray LB Neutral
$280... Heliopan High Transmissive



No, they aren't cheaper. See above (current prices at B&H Photo in NYC). B+W, Breakthrough and Formatt/Hitech are all pretty equal to Marumi and cost considerably less.

Same with Hoya... they are also among the more expensive, for filters of equal quality. While Marumi only makes one grade of filter, Hoya makes about half a dozen. Some of Hoya's lower grade C-Pol are cheaper than B+W, Breakthrough and Formatt/Hitech. B+W also makes some lower price, single-coated or uncoated filters that use aluminum frames instead of brass.



The Nikkor 28-300mm uses 77mm filters, while the 200-500mm uses 95mm... using the 95mm filter with a step ring would be very oversize on the smaller lens.

The main reason to not use a step ring is because you typically cannot use a lens hood when the lens is fitted with an oversize filter, and the lens hood is typically more important than any filter, protecting the lens from oblique light, as well as from bumps and hard knocks.



Agreed... And good luck finding a screw-in hood that's a very good match to a 28-300mm lens. It's not difficult to find a nice deep hood for a telephoto-telephoto zoom or shallow one to work with a wide-to-wide zoom or a pretty well matched one for a prime lens. But for lenses that are wide-to-normal-to-telephoto... it can be hard to find something that will work well.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

Yes. 3rd party batteries can be good (Wasabi for example) or mediocre (Vivitar for example) Filters also. Hoya Pro1 filters are every bit as good as B+W, but also cost more than the low-end filters.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

You get what you pay for does not always hold... "The Hoya Fusion Antistatic, costing 225 PLN in the moment of publication, got a result higher than 3. It won in both overall and econo rankings. Such a success means it is a really good filter and you can find devices of similar quality which cost much more." This filter is mid range in price and about as good as it gets. Why pay more. Read Jerry's second reference.
http://www.lenstip.com/139.25-article-Polarizing_filters_test_2015_Results_and_summary.html

MikieLBS Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"

Thanks, I thought of that but went ahead and ordered an adapter ring. I can throw it on for a few shots, pull the filter off and take a few more normally with the hood. I'm sure I'll still get at least a few keepers and it will be another learning experience. I don't think I'll be taking that many photos with that lens anyway

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

I wouldn't use a cheap filter. Another thing I have found (maybe it's my fault using the wrong camera setting) but when using a CPL on my 70-300 at airshows it seemed that it lowered the amount of light into the lens enough to affect the focus and it would continue to hunt, losing shots of near sonic high-speed fly-bys. It worked better to take off the CPL and adjust in PSE afterwards. The CPL I currently use was rated among the best on Lenstip.com is a 62mm Marumi DHG (Digital High Grade) Super PL.D. I think I paid about $70 for it. When used properly it does a fantastic job. I didn't see that particular filter on the current website during a search, unless it just had a different case look or revised name. I bought mine a few years ago.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Yes, critical AF with a CPL should be a definite concern ! Turns your 5.6 lens into f9-11.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

A 300 f/2.8 is on my wish list :)