badapple Loc: Twin Lake, Michigan

Seasons Greetings to All!
I'm a hobiest who would appreciate recommendations for a CPL filter. My camera is a Canon 80D and the lens for the CPL is a Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L is ii usm 77mm. Have used the "search" in uhh and read most entries. Also have viewed some videos. Still undecided so would appreciate some specific suggestions based on experience. $100-$200 range acceptable, less if still good quality. Have a Hoya on another lens which I have no problem with but am open to B&W, Lee, Tiffany, Breakthrough, etc. Shoot Landscape, Wildlife, Flowers, and anything else my eye catches.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts and suggestions.
Burt

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Burt, B&W top quality IMHO

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=b%2Bw%2072mm%20circular%20polarizer%20mrc%20filter&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ps

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Breakthrough Photography Circular Polarizer. You can ruin a great lens/camera combination with a cheap filter.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Over the years I have use mostly B+W filters and have never been disappointed with their performance, the resulting images and the longevity of the their equipment. I also have had good experience with Sing-Ray filters. I have use a few Tiffen filter from their older "professional" line and found them quite satisfactory- I don't know what they are producing nowadays. Hoya is a time-honored name in the industry and I know the produce many of the filters marketed by the camera brands. Much of my current commercial work requires high degrees of enlargement so filter quality, when filtration or polarization is required, is critical in terms of image quality.

The attributes to keep in mind are fine quality optical glass, precise craftsmanship and quality control, well crafted rims and threads and superior anti-flare coatings.

As you probably already know, high quality filters are a good investment in that the won't degrade the performance of you better lenses.

I am certain that the filters produced some of the othere manufacturers you have mentioned are of high quality, however, the ones named above are the brands I have had personal long time experience with and can recommend them good conscience.

I hope this helps.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Personally, I use the B&W Kaesemann and can highly recommend them. One note. It has been noted by a very knowledgeable poster that the 100-400L does not do well with filters, but not sure if that includes CPLs. Maybe shoot Alan (amfoto) a PM and ask his opinion...

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

The three brands I would look at are B&W, Hoya, and Breakthrough. You will want a Kaesemann CPL. It will cost more because it is better made and will not allow mold to grow (as one professional photographer found out after a couple of weeks in high humidity with a non-Kaesemann).

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I have noticed some talk online and in the photo-press that this Canon lens does not take too well to filters. Some users complain about soft images when filter are used while others have no issues. If the filter are of good optical quality, I can't imagine why this is happening. Polarising filter do have intrinsic neutral density and will cost you about 2 stops. Perhaps folks are not focusing critically at wider apertures or there is camera shake a slower shutter speed OR noise at high ISO settings when compensating for the neutral density???

I have never had the opportunity to use that particular lens. Hopefully other members will have had experience will this lens and filters and advise. I assume Canon markets a polarizing filter and other filters for that lens or they would mention any issues in their literature.

Bipod

That lens has 17 elements in 14 groups = 28 surfaces.
The coating is wonderful--but 28 surfaces is a lot. Imagine screwing 14 filters
to the front of your lens -- don't worry, they're Canon coated!

Try a little experiment: in daylight hours, turn off the lights in the room, and
(1) take a photo out a north facing window. Then turn on a bright light that is out of the
angle-of-view, but strikes the front element of the lens, and (2) take another photo.
And watch the contrast go away.

Now screw on a cheap uncoated UV filter. And (3) repeat the second shot.
Chances are you'll get more contrast than in (2), The cheap filter is acting as a hood
and making your lens work better. Unless it's scatched, it won't cause microflare.
It simply makes the image a tiny bit dimmer.

Looking at the MTF for that lens in EF Lens Work III, p.258, "constrasty"
is not the word that springs to mind. (And MFT tests ignore the worst offender:
bright lights outside the angle-of view.) All zoom lenses are convenience lenses--not
contrasty lenses. That lens is $1800 worth of convenience.

What's 2 more surfaces when you already got 28? After all, you aren't complaining
about the contrast you're losing now whenever you take a zoom lens out on a sunny day
without a lens hood (or two---400 mm benefits from a longer hood that would intrude
in the frame at 100 mm focal setting).

Just buy a reasonably priced CPL that's mutlicoated on both sides and you won't notice
any difference -- unless there is a bright light outside the angle-of-view, in which case
you'll see an improvement in contrast.

I have a Hoya SMC CPL and it's just fine -- even on very contrasty prime lenses where
I would definitiely notice loss of contrast. I have dozens of CPLs and old PLs of various
brands and most are just fine.

If you go to a local camera store, you can look at the coating by reflecting a light from it.
And you can test the polarizer by stacking two filters and turning one of them by 90 degrees.
Buy the cheapest one that works well.

Take the money you save and buy an adjustable lens hood--and never leave home without it.
Otherwise, what you got there is an $1800 flare factory.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

The newer MkII has 21 elements in 16 groups. Being an L, it ships with a matched (round) hood which is quite long (~4” lg.) and I always use, and so far no issues with flare, but I may not have encountered just the right conditions (I have the MKI), and I haven’t recently used my B&W CPL on it, so nothing to report either way.

Wanderer2 Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains

An in-depth review and ranking of 23 different CPLs: https://www.lenstip.com/139.1-article-Polarizing_filters_test_2015.html

It's three years old now but still useful. Whatever brand you choose I would suggest getting their top of the line version.

John N Loc: HP14 3QF Stokenchurch, UK

Marumi came out 2nd best in a comprehensive test I looked at before purchasing mine for use on a 60D. Renders a blue sky slightly bluer than many other models I think. Note that this purchase was made some 6 years ago.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

You've got a very good polarizer - though depending which version you have, it may not have the latest nano coating, which means it may need more frequent cleaning, but if you are looking for a substantial improvement in image quality, you may not see it by spending $$$$ on a B&W, Schneider, Heliopan, or Breakthrough filter - or a system like Lee. They all have a color cast, and they all rob a tiny bit of fine detail - regardless of price. Of course there will be people who swear by one brand or another - but their opinion may not be as well-informed as this one:

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/09/my-not-nearly-complete-but-rather-entertaining-circular-polarizer-filter-article/

Save your money.

kdogg Loc: Gallipolis Ferry WV

I have been using my Cokin filter system from the film days with good results. Had to buy CPL filter for my Tokina 11-16mm and went with a Slimline filter from Polaroid. I just use it for taking the shine off foilage not so much to darken the sky. To much banding in the sky with the ultra wide lenses.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Look up Hoya, rated as some of the best you can get quality wise.
I use a Hoya CPL on my 100-400L MII.

badapple Loc: Twin Lake, Michigan

I thank each and every one of you for your reply and the time you spent answering my question. You have helped me immensely.
Burt