Pretty sure this URL is for the Kenko Slim Smart Circular Polarizer Filter : 77mm for $19. I'd walked into the Belrose JB store and
Certainly saw the 'slim Smart Circular Polariser Filter @ 77mm' for same price of $19. Took a photo if anyone needs it.
I already have one from a while ago….was disappointed with myself to find a better deal.
They're both japanese though? I think they might even be the same company
Owned by the same company doesn't mean quality is the same. It's not!
In general I've found Kenkos are very comparable to the Hoyas. I own lots of both. While I wouldn't touch a few of the house brands I'm happy with the Kenkos.
I've also got terrible filters from Ebay I'll only put on lenses as protection while in storage because they destroy sharpness, contrast and colour.
I was thoroughly confused as to why anyone would want such a thing, but apparently they are mis-named.
For modern cameras, a circular polarizer is typically used; this comprises firstly a linear polarizer which performs the artistic function just described, followed by a quarter-wave plate which further transforms the now-linearly polarized light into circularly-polarised light before entering the camera. This additional step avoids problems with auto-focus and light-metering sensors within some cameras, which otherwise may not function reliably with a simple linear polariser.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizing_filter_(photography)
The problem is the word "circular" . In photography, we use a linear polarising filter that works the same as polaroid sunglasses.
Why would you want to filter circular polarised light? Well you don't. The name is misleading.
The filter part is actually linear. Real circular polarising filters are used in passive 3D TVs and glasses, but this is different.
The name isn't misleading. The linear polariser filters unpolarised light, resulting in linearly polarised light, then the quarter wave plate circularises the linearly polarised light.
Hence this filter circularly polarises light passing through it. Sure, the "actual" polarising filter is linear, but the combined stack of the linear polariser and the quarter wave plate are what makes it a circular polariser. I think it would be impossible to make a circular polariser with a single filter.
Passive 3D actually works the same way, just in reverse. The TV sends out circularly polarised light, the quarter wave plate then linearises the passing light, and then the linear polariser for each eye filters that light at a 90 degree phase relative to the other.
Would this work on my nikkon D3300 ?
You need to look at your lens and see what the lens diameter is. If it is 77mm then yes. If you have a kit lens….probabky not as these I think are 52mm.
Or you can buy a step-down ring from ebay cheaply to suit your lens but you won't be able to fit your lens hood with it.
Hmm ok. But for $19 i am a bit skeptical of the quality. However for $19 if it's no good i just toss it in river :)
Hi,
I am not a Nikon boy, so I don't know the lenses.
But if your glass is priced similar to your camera then this filter will be ok.
You will do way more damage by wrongly using it than by its own faults :-)
Given the camera price and assuming similarly priced lenses this is an excellent price for an entry level CPL in 77mm.
Keep in mind that Kenko/Hoya makes several levels of their filters HD, Pro 1, HMC,… This is the budget version, but still an excellent match for this camera and similar lens.
Once you get to the $2000+ lenses please do buy B&W filters ($200+)
No, but it'll work with your lens.
I can't find the info whether or not the filter has multi coating. It doesn't appear so from the image and description.
It isn't multi-coated, and it does degrade the image very slightly, but it also doesn't cost ~$80 and up. Here's a review by a DPReview user:
Description - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/39682198
Results - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/39682331
Note that the results this gent has given are 100% crops. The Kenko is definitely okay to my eyes. Loss is slight.
Prices for 77mm CPL on staticice.
http://www.staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=circular+77…
http://www.staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=CPL+77&spos…
Here's the filter on Kenko's site.
http://www.kenkoglobal.com/photo/filters/pl/circular_pl.html
…there were also 62mm INCA CPL's at $19, - they're not on the JB website, so could be a local deal only.
Inca is rubbish.
Agree. I had to return one last year. It wasn't usable. If I recall correctly it didn't even properly fit the filter thread because it was too thin.
Bummer need a 62mm
damn need 72mm.
nvm
E-series = economy series = probably average?
Picked up today and the one supplied was the Kenko Smart CPL thin here:
http://www.kenkoglobal.com/photo/filters/pl/smart_filter_cir…
Static ice showing lowest price on this as $65 from DWI.
Had a quick play on my 70-200. It's optically very good, with very little IQ degradation providing there is enough light and you're not having to over-compensate with ISO.
Reviews on Amazon UK and US agree:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Kenko-Circular-Polarising-Filter-Ca…
https://www.amazon.com/Kenko-Circular-Polarising-Filter-Came…
Mechanically it's a bit stiff. Being the thin "slim" model on a large lens means it easily jams on if too much pressure is applied twisting it on and if too little is applied when you turn the front element it can come off and drop. (Already done that. Thankfully it didn't break). It's quite a pain to use but will be manageable now I'm aware of the problem. The lens cap does clip on but not as securely as on a UV filer of standard thickness, or the lens with no filter.
Definitely a bargain. But I'd go for one that isn't thin if I was willing to pay full price. The non-slim does have the potential to vignette on some lenses.
Kenko are rubbish, invest in jap made Hoya.