Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Standard vs Slim CPL's

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    588

    Default Standard vs Slim CPL's

    I've done a bit of reading on CPL's and have decided to get one before the Australian summer comes.

    I was just wondering what the difference is (if any) between the standard and slim CPL's are.

    I'm planning on getting a B+W but don't know whether the extra $$$ is worth paying for a thin one.

    It will be used on my 24-70 with 30D body, so it isn't on something too wide. I also will be mounting it on top of my UV filter which is a B+W standard thickness UV.

    What do you guys and girls think???
    5D | 24-70L | 28mm f/1.8 | 580EX

  2. #2
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default Re: Standard vs Slim CPL's

    The silm filters, as the name suggests have a thinner profile. You don't really need that on the 24-70 and I certainly don't see the need to stack filters unless you are going for special effects.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    588

    Default Re: Standard vs Slim CPL's

    The reason for stacking would be because I am lazy. hahah

    Would it be fair to say that slim filters are more for wide lenses? ie. <16mm
    5D | 24-70L | 28mm f/1.8 | 580EX

  4. #4
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default Re: Standard vs Slim CPL's

    Yes, they are usually used with wide angles to reduce(or eliminate) vignetting.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Standard vs Slim CPL's

    No optical difference, unless vignetting occurs.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •