polarizer

[Gregory Sheffer]

For basic outdoor shooting using only natural light is a cir pol better than a linear pol? I have a red rock matte box so do they make cir polarizers in 4x5?

 

[Michael Olsen]

My understanding is that, for applications on the RED with manual lenses, a circular polarizer is theoretically superior to a linear polarizer. However, in practical use, the difference is so small it is negligible.

Don't worry about the Linear vs. Circular Polarizer issue.. Linear filters will work just fine on Scarlet and Epic, and Linear polarizers are an unnoticeable bit more efficient.

-http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=383499&postcount=10

Are you planning on using lenses with AF in the future?

 

[ericyoung]

On Red there is neglible difference - although linear polarisers will usually have a slightly stronger polarising effect than an equivalent circular one.

The only reason to buy the more expensive circular polariser is if you also intend to use it with other cameras with a beam splitter or mirror (such as a film camera with videotap, a DSLR with through the lens exposure metering and autofocus, or a 3 sensor video camera dichroic prism) as a linear polariser will then significantly affect the exposure/autofocus depending on the angle it is rotated. A circular polariser is therefore useable in any scenario with any camera, and so the more versatile choice.

Do a google search or reduser search on the subject - it has been discussed extensively already!

 

[Anders Yarbrough]

I believe the circular polas were originally made so that you could see image through a video tap. Mostly on the 435, because of the way the image is split between the viewfinder, film plane and video tap. The linear pola seems to block image on the tap.

I've found circular polas are always weaker than circular. Sometimes circular polas are 1 stop instead of 2 stops compensation as well.