CPL for 500mmII (52mm Drop-in PL-C 52) any reason not to get it?

Howdy All,

I want a circular polarizer for my 500mmII. It appears that the only way to get one that has the external rotation wheel is to get the Canon "52mm Drop-in Circular Polarizing Filter PL-C 52" unit. That's fine, but I want to make sure I haven't missed some issue with it or some after-market unit that out-performs it . I haven't read anything that talks about being able to remove that rotatable Canon filter element and screw-in a B+W in its place either. Comments?

I bought the Canon. I have only used it once in over a year. I always have it with me but as I shoot mostly wildlife, never bother with it. Sorry I can't help with IQ comparisons.

Haven't seen any complaints about that one.

Tapeman wrote in post #17099694
I bought the Canon. I have only used it once in over a year. I always have it with me but as I shoot mostly wildlife, never bother with it. Sorry I can't help with IQ comparisons.

Howdy Tapeman,

I hear ya . I can imagine that there are plenty of super telephoto users out there who bought the filter but just don't get into the shooting situations that justify the light loss over the polarizing benefits.

Also, I haven't seen anything yet that discusses the 52WII version over the previous generation polarizer drop-in .

rick_reno wrote in post #17099705
Haven't seen any complaints about that one.

Howdy Rick,

Thanks. I hope that remains the case .

I have one but VERY rarely use it.
Waste of money in my case!

I had one...used it once or twice just to test. Sold it.

Dave,

I just picked up a 500mm II a few months ago and did extensive research on Canon's drop-in polarizer. What I found is there is no better choice than Canon's polarizer. I suspect that companies like B+W (etc) don't make a drop-in circular polarizer for the super-teles based on the overall demand. They probably would not sell enough of them to warrant the engineering and production costs that come with designing/producing a new filter.

Personally, I've found Canon's drop-in polarizer to be a great tool and I've used it several times in the field. Specifically, I find it to be invaluable when shooting scenes with water. I've used this lens to shoot waterfalls as well as birds that are on or near the water. In both cases, the polarizer allowed me to create shots that I could not have done otherwise. The polarizer will also come in handy when shooting landscapes with clouds in them, but I have not come across that particular situation yet. (Yes, 500mm can offer a very unique perspective for landscapes!)

If you are only shooting birds/wildlife that are not near water, or using it for sports only, then the drop-in polarizer may not be of much use to you.

That's what I've discovered so far -- hope it helps!

Bryan

bps wrote in post #17101932
Dave,

...Specifically, I find it to be invaluable when shooting scenes with water. ...That's what I've discovered so far -- hope it helps!

Bryan

Howdy Brian,

Thanks for your input! Water is definitely on my horizon . I live 1mi from the beach. This morning, I shot-up a storm with the surfers. The CPL will come in handy. I expect to have one by my next session with the surfers.

Yesterday, I called Canon to determine the difference between the older drop-in and the newer one. They said the only difference is the slightly different color of the paint and that there is no difference elsewhere. Retailers (and Canon?) sure jack-up the price for the newer CPL if it is just a paint difference . I've seen it in the range of $70 more at some retailers who carry both. I'd have been a bit happier if that extra $$ went into advancing the CPL's optical performance .

I use the Canon PL-C 52 52mm Drop-In Circular Polarizing Filter in my 400mm f/2.8L IS lens when shooting fall football and swap it out as the light fades away. I also use it when shooting Marching Band competitions during daylight hours. It helps with reducing/removing glare off instruments and shiny uniform parts while it enriches colors. Browns, green and blues really benefit from it.

Bottom line is it helps add a bit of magic to your images that simply cannot be reproduced in post.

Ah that's right, I forgot to mention that too. That's what i found out when I did my research too. The only difference was the color of the paint. And I agree -- it's a crazy and unjustified price difference!

Bryan

canonphotog wrote in post #17102464
I use the Canon PL-C 52 52mm Drop-In Circular Polarizing Filter in my 400mm f/2.8L IS lens when shooting fall football and swap it out as the light fades away. I also use it when shooting Marching Band competitions during daylight hours. It helps with reducing/removing glare off instruments and shiny uniform parts while it enriches colors. Browns, green and blues really benefit from it.

Bottom line is it helps add a bit of magic to your images that simply cannot be reproduced in post.

Howdy Canonphotog,

I often shoot with CPLs screwed onto my usual lenses and I agree that the magic a CPL adds can sometimes be what "makes" the shot . I had forgotten about how useful they can be for reducing those sometimes pesky specular highlights.

I've got a couple that I typically use when shooting soccer with the 300/2.8 and 200/2 in bright conditions. I've never had any concern about the quality when comparing them to the B&W filters that I use on other lenes.

Bob

I shoot birds with my Canon 500mm usually at dawn and dusk when the light is not the best. I bought the Dropin CPL and used it maybe three times. Works well but you can loose up to 2 stops of light which is in limited supply at dawn and dusk to shoot birds.

My advice is to get one used and not new. Usually the used ones for sale are like new and around $175.

Dave Weldon wrote in post #17102592
Howdy Canonphotog,

I often shoot with CPLs screwed onto my usual lenses and I agree that the magic a CPL adds can sometimes be what "makes" the shot . I had forgotten about how useful they can be for reducing those sometimes pesky specular highlights.

I keep a CPL on my 24mm Tilt-shift. The same size that fits it also fits my 16-35 so it can be moved around if needed. Also carry a 77mm in the bag which fits the 70-200, 24-70 and 24-105 that I carry with me.

If you're going to be shooting surfing I would expect the CPL to be a tremendous boon for you. My only suggestion is that when using it, point the lens in what ever direction is 90 degrees to the sun and dial in the CPL so it is at the level of effect you desire (I prefer full polarization), then go back to shooting whatever your intended subject is. You'll be able to adjust for the two stops lost easily and if the light direction changes or you are swinging the lens, you will have the optimum polarization effect when needed.

If I'm not seeing much polarization effect from the CPL I will seek out those "specular" annoyances and adjust it to knock them down. That lets me know I'm dialed in the way I want to be.

Since you already make use of a CPL on shorter lenses, this shouldn't come as news to you, then again, I'm one of those guys that still uses the DOF preview button.

Enjoy!