Hi,


when I bought my 70-200 a month back, the guy in the shop threw in an old, used polariser they had flying around. Since I've never used one before, I wanted to try it out without spending much — I can always buy a better one later. As it turns out, the quality with the polariser is absolutely terrible, I can't even use it for a "first experience".


I'm posting some samples below; if anybody can tell me whether this is normal for an old/cheap/used/??? polariser? Would an new/expensive one be only half as bad or would there be no noticeable degradation?


Another question I wanted to ask about polarisers: What is the widest lens you can comfortably recommend a polariser for (so that the differences of the effect in different parts of the frame don't become too big)? I'm currently contemplating a CPL for the 70-200 and an ND for the 24-70; darn the different sizes...


Thanks, Colin


70mm no filter


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.43/70.jpg[/img]


70mm with polariser


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.43/70CPL.jpg[/img]


200mm no filter


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.43/200.jpg[/img]


200mm with polariser


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.43/200CPL.jpg[/img]


PS: I'm assuming that it's a circular polariser because AF still works as good as it can, i.e. it doesn't get better with MF. Speaking of focus, these are crops from larger pictures not from where the focus point was, but from where the difference between with and without filter is most visible; the lens can do better than that.