Amazon Basics Circular Polarizer Camera Lens Filter - 55 mm

Watch the video on YouTube to remove glare from glasses on my Zoom calls, worked exactly as expected!

Cheaper than camera store and just as good

At the price of just over $10 I decided to give this CPL filter a chance. The filter is made in China and packaging was nice but not as fancy as more expensive filters. Is packaging too important? Probably not, as long as it allows for the safe and easy storage when the filter is not in use.There are lots of reviews on this item, so I am not going to repeat what other people said and instead concentrate on testing for a few potential claims about this filer brought up in the reviews.1. Filter does not work, or makes no difference - FALSEThis filter works as a CPL filter supposed to, i.e., significantly reduces light reflections because of that helps capture more of the useful dynamic range and details.2. Filter introduces unacceptable color shift - FALSE, esp. with Auto WBIf you look at the provided samples you will notice a slight color shift if I calibrate WB and use the same value for both no CPL and CPL. However with Auto WB the camera perfectly compensates for this and the difference is unnoticeable.3. The filter reduces image sharpness - FALSEThe difference in sharpness is impossible to tell, particularly when using A7RIII (42MP full-frame resolution) and a good lens (Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art at 70mm)4. The filter significantly reduces the amount of light - TRUE but no more than 1-1.5stopThe CPL/no CPL comparison images have exactly the same aperture and shutter speed. The only difference is for CPL the ISO increased from 100 to 200. This is much better than many expensive filters producing more than 2stops of light reduction.5. The filter has no multi-coating - hard to prove or disproveThe reflections from this filter are definitely stronger than B+W but they are comparable with the filters in the $50-70 price range. Also the greenish tint may indicate that the filter is not uncoated glass. The real life pictures taken against the sun show some increase in flares but it is not too bad.6. The filter causes vignetting - TRUE for a wide angle lens (but no more than other non-slim filters)This filter is not what is called "slim". It has the same thickness as most other filters, so it is likely comparable with them in terms of vignetting. If you are concerned about vignetting then you should be looking for a super-slim filter.7. The filter looks and feel cheap - TRUEYes this filter is not as smooth more expensive ones and makes a slight "hissing" sound when being rotated. It also has a tendency of thread-freezing (do not over tighten or you may have to leave on forever!). However the lack of any fancy look and feel does not impact the filter functions.Overall conclusion: if you are in looking for a perfect professional quality filter and money is not an issue, you will get better results with something like B+W XS-Pro Kaesemann High Transmission Circular Polarizer MRC-Nano Filter. However if you are on a budget and only need it for occasional use, this filter seems to be a safe choice.

best value for money, good quality highly recommeneded!!

Honestly was shocked on the quality. It's nothing crazy, but I was expecting a flimsy plastic lens for 10 bucks. just get it, theres nothing to regret with that price.The effect is pretty nice too, i liked the look it was giving my photos of the coast. Nicely toned down water reflection and the look of the cliffs. Here's some random (unedited/Auto settings) photos so you get an actual visual of what it does

Great for car photography

In the past, I used the Cokin creative filter system, which was a system for stacking filters in front of your lens. That system was bulky and used a traditional linear polarizer. This Circular Polarizer screws onto the front of the camera lens yet still allows you to rotate the filter. I tried testing this by stacking it with the linear polarizer I had but that's not right. But once you figure it out it's quite cool.Unlike a linear polarizers, Circular Polarizers contains a Linear Polarizer component that does the main work of polarization, as well as a second layer inside the filter called a Quarter Wave Plate, which “spins” the light after it goes through the linear layer and before it enters the camera lens. This extra spin eliminates a problem with some cameras where the polarized light from a linear filter messes with the camera optics and occasionally makes your picture go black.So this is convenient in that it fits right on your lens and doesn't introduce any complications that might make your image go black as it would with a linear polarizer.

I replaced my Sony A-mount 70-300mm G lens with a Sony E-mount 70-200mm. I needed a new 72mm polarizer for the 70-200mm, and I wondered if the AmazonBasics was good enough. Since I already had a B+W 62mm Kaesemann Circular Polarizer with Multi-Resistant Coating for the 70-300mm G and a Sigma EX DG 62mm Wide Multi-Coated Circular Polarizer Filter (OLD MODEL) for a Sony 10-18mm, I decided to get a 62mm AmazonBasics to compare with the other two first.To compare the filters I first customized the white balance of my Sony A6000 with a light panel, and then I placed all three filters on the light panel and took a picture. After I imported the attached image into Adobe Lightroom, I took three separate RGB readings for each filter and the panel. The top one in the picture is the AmazonBasics, the bottom left is the B+W, and the bottom right is the Sigma. The average values for each area are:Panel: R 94.17 G 94.17 B 94.17Amazon: R 78.33 G 78.87 B 77.37B+W: R 68.87 G 69.60 B 71.73Sigma: R 72.83 G 73.50 B 74.40You can tell from these values that the B+W and the Sigma have more blue, and the AmazonBasics has a green tint. Also the AmazonBasics' light transmission is higher than the other two.I reset my A6000 to auto white balance and took some pictures with the 10-18mm and all three filters. I set the aperture to f/8.0 and focal length to 18mm, and I rotated the filters until the longest exposure was achieved, meaning the sky was the darkest and the polarizing effect was maximized. For the same scene the shutter speed for the AmazonBasics was 1/60", and the other two filters used 1/50". When viewing the pictures on a calibrated monitor, the B+W and the Sigma images are almost identical and the blue skies look better. As expected the sky in the AmazonBasics image is not as good, and it's not easy to adjust it in Lightroom to match the other two, but if you don't compare them side by side you probably wouldn't know the difference. In terms of sharpness I can't see any difference.The AmazonBasics has the same thickness as the B+W, so both cause vignetting at the 10mm end. Considering the B+W cost twice as much of the Sigma, I think the Sigma EX DG is the best value for me. If you are a casual shooter who only uses kit lenses and shoots JPEGs, the AmazonBasics is definitely a good value. If you are a more demanding photographer, you probably want a better filter to match your expensive gears.