Polarisers on Nikon

Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
3,862
Location
New Zealand
I've always owned straight polarisers. Used them on all my film and digital Pentax SLRs with no problem. They are a lot cheaper than circular polarisers.

Any trouble using a non-circular polariser on Nikons, specifically my D300s but also others in case I upgrade one day?
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
3,862
Location
New Zealand
I know I've been told that you're supposed to use a circ on DSLR, but I've had 3 Pentaxes that never had a problem with it, even on auto focus and metering, so was wondering of this was the same for Nikon. Maybe I'll just have to play safe.

(PS. I'm only up to page 275 of the manual so far *phew*)
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
20,114
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
My understanding is that it's not that linear polarizers will never work properly with a digital camera. Instead, it's that they won't work properly some of the time.

By the way, as in any product, there are really good polarizers and there are polarizers that are not so good. Just because a polarizer is circular doesn't mean that it's the polarizer of choice.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
5,614
Location
Texas
Good luck then. :smile: Linear polarizers risk messing up the metering and AF functions on SLR. Always been true. These have mirrors and beam splitters in them. You don't want limited light reaching your light meter.

I believe every single one of hundreds of pages with a linear polarizer filter at B&H carries the warning: PLEASE NOTE: All auto-focus SLR and certain manual focus SLR cameras require circular polarizers. Consult your instruction manual.

The D300S instruction manual specifically says "no way". But it is your camera. :smile:

IMO, there are better places to scrimp.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
3,862
Location
New Zealand
My understanding is that it's not that linear polarizers will never work properly with a digital camera. Instead, it's that they won't work properly some of the time.

By the way, as in any product, there are really good polarizers and there are polarizers that are not so good. Just because a polarizer is circular doesn't mean that it's the polarizer of choice.
Hadn't heard that "some of the time" before, may as well be all of the time though! Yep, know about good quality v cheap, thanks for the reminder though.

I believe every single one of hundreds of pages with a linear polarizer filter at B&H carries the warning: PLEASE NOTE: All auto-focus SLR and certain manual focus SLR cameras require circular polarizers. Consult your instruction manual.

The D300S instruction manual specifically says "no way". But it is your camera. :smile:

IMO, there are better places to scrimp.
Damn, caught me scrimping:redface: They just seem so damn expensive for a bit of coloured glass! :rolleyes: My AF Nikon F65 coped with it too, maybe it's so damn old it's time to replace it anyway. My new lens threads are all different sizes to my old :mad:

I appreciate your input.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
3,862
Location
New Zealand
Yeah i know you can do that, but for some reason it doesn't appeal to me. I don't think it would suit the way I store and use my gear. Though the 16-85 and 70-300 both use 67mm filters, so that's a bonus. And to tell you the truth I probably won't be requiring one on the 70-200, which is 77mm, nor the 35mm which is, smaller.

So I guess I can shell out for a CPL then...
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
20,114
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
They just seem so damn expensive for a bit of coloured glass!

Isn't THAT the truth?!!!!!!! Even so, when I decided to go digital, I resigned myself to getting a circular polarizer for each lens. I had used stepup rings for linear polarizers and hated everything about using them.

Some people feel that polarizers are needed only to reduce glare now that digital post-processing can create the effect of using a polarizer on a sky. I still prefer using the polarizer in all situations.
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
3,969
Location
Chicago
That is what the instructions say. Linears seem to work fine.

The work around for exposure if you have a problem is to rotate to find the shortest exposure, that will be correct. Then rotate to polarize to effect without changing exposure. This works because you line up the polarize direction to the direction on the mirror. At the wrong angle, they then cross polarize cutting out way too much light.

AF seems to work on the cameras I have tried.

Or meter and focus first, then add 1.5 to 2 stops and then add filter.
This always works, never fail any camera anywhere.

Get a Heliopan or B+W or Leica. Tiffin cast a green tinge which you can take out, but it is a pain. That is Tiffin liners or circ., does not matter, same muddy green. Older Leicas B/4 color film did the same green. Leicas made since 1985 or so are also neutral. Never tried a Nikon one for color. Presumably they are all circa anyway.

Right now I use a B+W circa with step up rings because I already own it.

My advice is to use one for reflection control only, leaves in sun, windows and such. Skies are better controlled in photoshop or NX2. Further you need a really nice blue to start with. A pola will not help a hazy blue one bit. And they do not work with wide lenses well as the angle to the sun changes too much across the frame with lenses wider than 35 FX, 24DX.

Fix a bad blue sky with hue, saturation or darken, or a blue gradient with all but the sky masked off. You will be happier.

They were a pretty good tool in film days, not so much now.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
3,185
Location
Westchester County, NY
"Even so, when I decided to go digital, I resigned myself to getting a circular polarizer for each lens."

Just to reiterate, it is not the fact that a camera is digital that creates the problems. It is the AF and auto exposure that may fail. Linear polarizers did not work with my F5 either.

The fact that most (all?) digital SLRs are AF and AE might make it seem like "digital" is the culprit, but digital has nothing to do with the reason why you can't use a linear polo.
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
2,115
Location
Nowhereland
Some people feel that polarizers are needed only to reduce glare now that digital post-processing can create the effect of using a polarizer on a sky. I still prefer using the polarizer in all situations.

Yeah I keep hearing that one and even tried Nik ColorEFX, if the sky is blown the pseudo-cp doesnt cut it, the information isnt there. I use the real thing. I have used CP for years even with film so to me it isnt a major change.
All I can say Russ is try your Linears and see if they will work it isnt like you can break anything using them and, atleast it is digital so you are wasting anything but time.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
20,114
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
and keep in mind that Nikon recommends not using Matrix metering w/ a CP (or any filter that has an exposure factor of one stop or more); you should use CW metering.

Thanks for mentioning that, as I was not aware of it. If I check my histogram after capturing an image and adjust the exposure if needed, is there any reason not to use matrix metering?

To be precise, the D7000 manual recommends using matrix metering at over an exposure factor of one stop, not one stop or more.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
3,862
Location
New Zealand
All I can say Russ is try your Linears and see if they will work it isnt like you can break anything using them and, atleast it is digital so you are wasting anything but time.
Can't - wrong size, hence the angst at buying new ones!

and keep in mind that Nikon recommends not using Matrix metering w/ a CP (or any filter that has an exposure factor of one stop or more); you should use CW metering.
Didn't know that, cheers.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2010
Messages
30
Location
Massachusetts
and keep in mind that Nikon recommends not using Matrix metering w/ a CP (or any filter that has an exposure factor of one stop or more); you should use CW metering.
That makes no sense at all to me. I use GNDs all the time, typically in landscape-style shots. Matrix metering is exactly what I would want to use for those, and I want to meter the after-filtered light. Why on earth would a 0.6 GND cause problems for either the focusing or the metering subsystem? BTW, I am not aware of having experienced any problem, but that may reflect my limitations as a photographer or my Irish luck.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
1,384
Location
California, USA
Real Name
Michael
I thought of doing that and then decided against it because it would preclude me from using the hood for the lens once a step up adapter is in place. I haven't thought of a good way around that.
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Messages
16,847
Location
West of Boston
Thanks for mentioning that, as I was not aware of it. If I check my histogram after capturing an image and adjust the exposure if needed, is there any reason not to use matrix metering?

To be precise, the D7000 manual recommends using matrix metering at over an exposure factor of one stop, not one stop or more.

Interesting Mike...I'm quoting the Thom Hogan manual, first my D300 and then my D3/D3s.

That makes no sense at all to me. I use GNDs all the time, typically in landscape-style shots. Matrix metering is exactly what I would want to use for those, and I want to meter the after-filtered light. Why on earth would a 0.6 GND cause problems for either the focusing or the metering subsystem? BTW, I am not aware of having experienced any problem, but that may reflect my limitations as a photographer or my Irish luck.

I believe it's for >1 stop effect...looks like you're safe?
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
5,114
Location
Miami, Florida, USA.
and keep in mind that Nikon recommends not using Matrix metering w/ a CP (or any filter that has an exposure factor of one stop or more); you should use CW metering.

You took words from my mouth. I am also in agreement that AF could not perform properly with a linear polarizer.
I find myself using a polarizer almost exclusively to eliminate reflections from non metallic surfaces. I do not use polarizers to darken a blue sky, especially with wide angles. I do not use polarizers to saturate colors, like I used to with slide film.
I come from an old school that taught me to meter first and add from 1 to 2 stops of light when using a polarizer. One stop if rotating the filter does not produce a visible effect and 2 if going to full polarization.
I find myself also using a polarizer as a 2 stop neutral density filter often.
Polarizers are not in good company with matrix metering.

William Rodriguez
Miami, Florida.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom