Amazon Basics Circular Polarizer Camera Lens Filter - 55 mm

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.

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 purchased this filter primarily for motorsport photography on a long lens (Canon 70-300mm F4-5.6L). The purpose was to cut through windshields and reduce reflections on foliage in a lot of my scenery. With that in mind, here are my thoughts:Pros: Does all the wonderful things you want a CPL to do (cuts through the glass, reduces flaring) & at an incredibly cheap price (look at high end CPL's approaching 10x the cost).Cons: Does all the negative things CPL's do (such as reducing light reaching the sensor - which will require higher ISO at the same camera settings) AND also produces very soft images. There is some ghosting/nervous bokeh when stopped down on the long end of the zoom (300mm + lenses seem to be more susceptible to these issues with cheap filters). I would not expect these issues if you bought it for landscape photography with a wide lens - but I haven't tried it. I suspect the softness will remain present.So, if it deteriorates the images so much, why 4 stars instead of 2-3? Price! This filter is so cheap it's practically free. It's perfect for someone getting into photography that wants to play with and learn how to use different filters. If your media is being shrunk to be posted on social media sites like FB or IG - this filter works great. It's 1/3 the price of the cheapest used 'pro grade' filter I've found. You can't beat that.Personally, I won't be using it after extensive testing in my use case. When you are pixel peeping, chasing perfection, and making money off your photography - this filter won't do... I will be handing it down to a friend learning how to use a camera.

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

good choice

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.

best value for money, good quality highly recommeneded!!

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.