Need 110mm polarizing filter for 165mm Super Angulon MC

[sdean7855]

From B&H new, a B+H is $500+, more than half what I spent for the lens. I do love polarizing filters and am trying to figure out how to achieve this in some simple and affordable fashion. In the '80's I got the nicest Polaroid 6x6 gels free as samples from the late great Polaroid company and did lovely work with them like this. But those gels have fogged.
I ask the collected wisdom of the readers: what's a simple, direct way to do polarizing filtering on a lens this big...that doesn't cost a mint? One listee has offered a 120-110 step down ring, and there is a B+H 120mm filter up on eBay....but the filter is unmounted, just the glass. I would prefer glass to gels for their durability.

[Bob Salomon]

Most polarizing gels are not made for shooting through. They are made for lighting. Glass square polarizing gels are available for shooting.

You are aware, if you plan to use the filter for outdoor work, that using a polarizer with a wide angle lens will result in banding in the sky as parts of the sky are naturally polarized while other parts aren't and a wide angle will capture both resulting in banding?

[Eric Leppanen]

Options include the Cokin X-Pro filter system or just taping a large rectangular polarizer to the front of the lens using gaffer's tape or equivalent. The latter is the approach I used when attaching a polarizer to my SS210XL lens some years ago. Some folks have improvised home-made filter holders (made out of foam or other materials) to avoid the expense of the filter system approach with its associated holders, adapter rings, etc. The challenge with the home-made approach is securing the holder to the lens, ensuring that if the camera is tilted forward the filter won't fall off and shatter on the ground or fall into a creek. SK Grimes can fabricate a press-on holder which secures to the lens barrel via a tightening screw, but it is likely to be expensive.

Using a step-down ring can result in vignetting when movements are applied. Applying a polarizer to the rear element is not feasible for a variety of reasons (image quality issues, focus shift, etc.).

[Bob Salomon]

O

Options include the Cokin X-Pro filter system or just taping a large rectangular polarizer to the front of the lens using gaffer's tape or equivalent. The latter is the approach I used when attaching a polarizer to my SS210XL lens some years ago. Some folks have improvised home-made filter holders (made out of foam or other materials) to avoid the expense of the filter system approach with its associated holders, adapter rings, etc. The challenge with the home-made approach is securing the holder to the lens, ensuring that if the camera is tilted forward the filter won't fall off and shatter on the ground or fall into a creek. SK Grimes can fabricate a press-on holder which secures to the lens barrel via a tightening screw, but it is likely to be expensive.

Using a step-down ring can result in vignetting when movements are applied. Applying a polarizer to the rear element is not feasible for a variety of reasons (image quality issues, focus shift, etc.).

The biggest challenge is maintaining parralasim between the filter and the lens at all camera positions,

[sdean7855]

Interesting...that may explain things I've seen with CFP and digital cameras...I can't say I've encountered this with linear polarizers and film. I generally have two interests: shots with sky, in which case I'll see that effect and not use it or water, where it's perhaps less of a problem...and again I'll see it. The depth of technical expertise and hard-won wisdom in this forum is amazing and illuminating. Thanks!

[Deval]

I talked to the filter experts at filters pro and they mentioned that 110mm is often written in error on sales websites The threads are technically 112mm and 110mm isn't a true filter thread. You could look at the lens manufacturer to verify. Lee does make a 112 long lens adapter

[Jac@stafford.net]

You are aware, if you plan to use the filter for outdoor work, that using a polarizer with a wide angle lens will result in banding in the sky as parts of the sky are naturally polarized while other parts aren't and a wide angle will capture both resulting in banding?

I would like to see banding from a film photograph. I've no idea what it would look like.
.

[StoneNYC]

I would like to see banding from a film photograph. I've no idea what it would look like.
.

I would assume Bob means this effect? See how the water is dark on the left and light on the right, and sky is light on the left and dark on the right?

In my defense I had an 85B, a graduated ND, AND a circular polarizer, I thought I lined it all up correctly... Lol

4x10 image