xl2 circular polariser
 

the standard xl2 has built-in ND filters, but is it necessary to have a polariser as well? if so, which ones do you folks use?

Spend the most you can. Tiffen or equal quality. Forget the bargain bundle goodies offered by many on line companies. These bargain products subtract from the finished shot.

Hi Jon,

A circular polarizer is pretty much thought of as a standard accessory. Although it will reduce exposure like the ND, a polarizer's main use is to reduce glare. It is common for video folks to avoid filters and "do it in post" but the glare and reflection reduction you can get with a properly used polarizer can't duplicated in a NLE. If you recorded glare on a window, that's what's in the image and whatever was behind the window just wasn't recorded.

Here's a link to the polarizing filter page of the tiffen web site that also contains links to all their filters:

http://www.tiffen.com/Filter_&_Lens_...FILT_06_07.htm

Happy shooting!

thanks
 

thanks guys!

also, once you have the polarising filter, is it necessary, or even possible, to simultaneously use a uv filter?

p.s. the tiffen link was very helpful. is this the best brand?

Extra glass = extra muddy. The uv filter is often recommended for lens protection only so it along with the C.P. would be redundant.

This was covered in another thread recently. The summary: 1. CP filters have some UV absorbtion but UV filters start absorbing at longer wavelengths and thus give better protection against UV. 2. Silicon CCDs are not sensitive to UV so UV protection is not needed. 3. Therefore the value of a UV filter on a video camera (with silicon CCD's) is soley as a protective device. 4. A CP filter provides protenction. 5. Any air-glass interface will cause reflections and potential flare. 6. Don't use a CP and UV filter with a video camera.

How many stops do you lose with the CP?

At http://www.pbase.com/agamid/image/39336430 I've posted the absorbtion for a Kenko circular polarizer. Over the visble part of the range the absorbtion appears to be about 0.4. As 1 stop is 0.3 this filter would require about 1 and 1/3 stops additional exposure.

just bought the B&W polarizer today
 

I hear it's supposed to be better than the Tiffen.

Looking forward to trying it.

I've been using a 4x4 polorizer by Zhang which I enjoy considerably.

It is a round filter in a 4x4 frame so it fits in a matte box. On the top side is a small dial that rotates the round filter in the 4x4 frame. This allows you to easily make polorizer adjustments on the fly without having to use a rotatable stage on a matte box. Rotating a stage on a matte box is sometime a little clumsy and certainly not smooth but I can even rotate the Zhang while operating a shot if needed as it is very smooth.

The quality of the glasis great and easily comparable to the other known brands out there.


BTW-Elimination of glare is an important use of the polorizer but let's not forget it's use in controlling reflections and getting that sky nice and blue!

polariser
 

is it really of more use for outdoor shoots? my project is 99% indoors. do i need the polariser?

Likely not required unless you have a huuuuuge amount of lighting and you want to stop the lens down even more for less DOF. But for that you would use ND filters.

Personally, I never shoot exteriors on video or film without a polorizer.

You must be careful using it outdoors as it can sometimes be noticeable on wide sky shots if the camera is moving. It works wonderfully on lock offs and does a great job tuning in the color of grass and foilage by dialing out the reflections.