> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 14:04:32 +0100
> From: "andreas puefke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> hi there,
>
>
> i just can't see why a nikon polarizer should be worth a single cent more
> than
> a B&W one. B&W is a brand name of a company named Schneider Kreuznach, well
> known
> e.g. for their superb quality enlargement lenses. and AFAIK, they produce
> the whole filter line for leica and other quality manufacturers. have you
> died-in-the-wool nikon shooters ever heard of leica? if so, you're likely to
> admit that they make some fine optics, eh?
>
> andreas puefke, photojournalist
Hi,
While I'm not going to get into a debate about who's polarizer is better I
will make this observation. I started out getting Nikon polarizers for my
52mm and 62mm filter sized lenses. I then wanted to get a polarizer for my
Nikon 300mm F4 AF lens. That puppy needed an 82mm filter (this was in 1989
way before a drop in 39mm circular polarizer was a gleam in Kirk
Enterprises or Nikon's eye.) I decided to opt for a B+W 82mm circular
polarizer. I took some pictures with it using Fuji Velvia. My slides had a
noticeable brown cast to them. This was easily compared with other slides
taken with the same lens but no polarizer as well as other lenses using my
52mm and 62mm Nikon polarizers. The Nikon polarizers were definately more
color neutral than was the B+W. Now possibly it was just that particular
filter, but there was a difference.
I would suggest that when you do pick filters, you pick filters from the
same manufacturer whether they be Nikon, B+W, Hoya, Tiffen, whatever. That
way if there is any color bias, it will be the same no matter what size
filter you are using.
Scott D. Burnside
