Not really. A CPL is 2 filter elements stacked (dat's why dey's
thickish). the first is a good old linear polarizer. The second is some
kinda thing the name of which escapes me just now, but anyway, it sorta
spins the light around and unpolarizes it (mostly) so it doesn't mislead
polarization sensitive light meters. So the front layer does just what
polarizer have always done, filter out certain light that has been
polarized by reflection, and rotation does the same thing for your
pictures that it always did. It just sounds more complicated and costs more.
You are right, it's way too expensive to buy for ND, but it could double
for that purpose if it's at hand an an ND isn't. As I posted
Yesterday(?), stacking them may lead to unprdictable results.
Moose
Jim L'Hommedieu wrote:
I thought the pattern in a circular polarizer is circular, that is,
concentric circles, sharing a common center. So the inner most circle has a
very small diameter, and each successive circle, surrounding its
predecessor, is slightly bigger. Rotating such a circular polarizer has no
meaning, unless the centers don't match the center of the lens axis.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|