Amazon BasicsCircular Polarizer Camera Lens Filter - 58 mm

The media could not be loaded. FOR THE PRICE IT DOES A GREAT JOB!!! My footage is colorgraded/color edited but the actual color quality of the filter is accurate, i shoot in Flat/Log type of profiles so I correct it in post. Clarity is great, and this is overall the best bang for your buck in terms of a polarizer to reduce glare through windows.

Been using this a couple years now. I didn't review right away because I wanted a chance to use it and see how it worked.This filter is fairly decent, works as it should. Works as good as my more expensive (and older) Quantaray polarizer filter and for a way lower price. Definitely a good buy for someone who's on a budget and need a polarizer filter.

This filter fits well and does the job, but there are better options available. I find that this filter creates a slight haze and does not reduce glare as well nor provide the same depth as higher-end polarizing filters. It's a good budget choice, but would not recommend for folks who want the clearest shot possible.

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

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.

Works like a champ. But at a budget price!

I am a bargain hunter. I love to find good quality merch at a very good price. I also have the strange affliction that I want the things I own to do the best that they can do. I can understand when the headphones I bought for $99 do not perform like the noise-canceling world-class brand which sells at $599, but I do want them to suit my needs.In the case of this CPL filter, it way over-performs. I could bore you to death about how CPL filters work and what kind you might need. Nobody needs to die for this to be a good review. If you know what a CPL is for, and you need one that isn't going to cause you to spend your child's college fund in order to take decent photos at their next soccer game, the filters on this listing are for you. These are very effecting CPLs, and they are priced as if they fell off the back of a truck. Buy the one that fits your camera, and use it every day. It's cheap enough to almost be disposable. You could buy 2 and still be more than $150 ahead of the classy German CPL your DSLR hobbyist web site told you to buy.

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.