Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Mirrorless - circular or linear polarizer?

Subject: Re: [OM] Mirrorless - circular or linear polarizer?
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 20:00:49 -0500
I pretty much agree with your sentiments on polarizers but do use them 
on rare occasion such as knocking reflections off glass.  I just got 
some test images from Don Holbrook (via private mail) using his E-M1 
with linear and circular polarizers at 90 degrees to the sun at 14mm and 
f3.5, f5.6 and f9.0.  Other than a very slight exposure difference 
between the two images sets I can't tell the difference (in the 1280x960 
web size images at least).

What's even more surprising than no difference in the images is that 
they were all shot with the DZ 11-22.  Focusing this lens on the E-M1 
should (as I understand it) be dependent on the phase detect sensor 
elements in the E-M1.  Perhaps, if the linear polarizer has neutralized 
the PD elements of the sensor it will fall back to the contrast detect 
elements.  I've asked Don to comment whether any focusing problems were 
observed.  Pretty good news so far.

Chuck Norcutt


On 3/5/2014 7:12 PM, Moose wrote:
> On 3/5/2014 12:21 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> Then, as you suggested, the X-Pro1 is not a valid test case for the
>> E-M5.  Calling E-M5 owners....
>
> I have the gear (E-M5, various polarizers, 37=>49 and 58 mm step-up rings 
> arrived today, for another purpose), but
> little enthusiasm.
>
> I proved to myself long ago, when I started scanning film, that post 
> processing was more effective for skies, foliage,
> etc. than polarizers. It was especially so for WAs and SWAs (18/3.5 and 
> 21/3.5).
>
> With better software and skills, that's even more true today.
>
> All I can figure I'd need a polarizer for is knocking down specular 
> highlights and 'seeing through' water and glass.
>
> Specular highlights aren't a feature, or at least not unnatural looking, in 
> my favorite subjects. Wavelets in the sun
> SHOULD sparkle, for example.
>
> When shooting through water surfaces and glass, there are already image 
> effects stronger than I imagine could possibly
> come from using a linear polarizer. I just don't think there's going to be an 
> observable difference.
>
> I've dutifully carried polarizers around for many years and many, many miles 
> (Such a good, obedient boy, Moosie.), and
> just don't use them. I've been trying to remember when I last actually used 
> one in the field; it's been a looooog time.
>
> So if the sun comes out (Hurrah for Rain!!!), and I get a sudden burst of 
> energy ... But don't hold your breath. :-)
>
> Un Polarized* Moose
>
> * Centrist? Or Anarchist?
>
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz