In article ,
"Matt Clara" wrote:


The circular will tend to give slightly _poorer_ results, as it's designed
to let some polarized light through, as some camera's autofocus systems (and
ttl metering) depends upon it to get the job done.

--
www.mattclara.com

No. They polarize exactly the same. All the quarter wave plate does is
allow some light to be processed properly by the AE or the AF, or both,
systems if your camera has a beam splitter in the optical path.

There are other factors that would make one type of polarizer more
effective then another. For instance a Kaesmann polarizer, linear or
circular, would be marginally more effective as the foil in a Kaesmann
is stretched tight in all directions and lies flatter then a simply
laminated polarizer. To keep the foil stretched tight the Kaesmann has
edge sealed glass rather then just laminated glass.

A properly hard coated polarizer with a modern MC that repels dust and
moisture while also passing up to 99.9% of the light hitting it to the
image plane (less what the polarizer eliminates of course) like the
Heliopan SH-PMC coated polarizers will be more effective then a coated,
uncoated or Kaesmann polarizer due to the coatings used. As well as the
quality of the foils used.

There are several grades of polarizers for optical use in photography.
Better polarizers use higher grades which are more color neutral and
have less effect on resolution then cheaper foils. The less expensive
polarizing filters may not be as effective due to the foil quality as
well as to the coatings and glass used.

--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.