PolarPro or Skyreat ND filters

[Skyreat]

Except they haven't given us any evidence at all...we got an unprofessional Excel screenshot containing no credible data whatsoever. You or I could type that up in 2-3 minutes and it does not include many of the variables important to filter quality, which were likely left out intentionally. If they want to show their brand is superior or the same as someone else (a claim they made), they can't also be the ones providing, purchasing, or soliciting that information. That goes for anyone. In no scenario should a customer ever take the manufacturer's word for it when they claim to be the best, why would it be different here?

If you go ask hungry salesmen at Ford, GMC, and Dodge dealerships who makes the best pickup truck, what answer do you think they will each give you? They all probably have an award or certification to show you as well (many of which can be bought, like the BBB ratings). Companies go to great lengths to do these sort of things and make biased data look impartial. I work in marketing for a living and I see it all the time. Again, this is not an insult to Skryeat and I am not saying their data is wrong, you just have to take it with a grain of salt. They are claiming their filters are as good or better compared to Polar Pro, so it's up to them to find a way to show us impartial third party data covering all the variables necessary to make such a claim.

Here are some photos that are being tested

 

[stberlin]

Really though, what value is the data to you guys when the source is the company themselves? Internal testing has value to the company, but carries little weight outside of that. Independent third party testing would be needed for any meaningful, unbiased data for public consumption. It's like how every vehicle manufacturer says their cars are the best, and puts out tests funded and performed by them that show they are the best haha.

Also, PolarPro does have a point - why would they show their competition detailed, precise, data outlining where they might be better or have an edge? They might as well send the competition instructions on how to copy them more precisely haha. I also understand that it would be helpful to see the data, so what we really need is an independent third party test. Anyways, they politely retracted their comment which is fine and probably the responsible thing to do.

I'll also go out on a limb and guess that Skyreat doesn't end up posting all of the data that we would actually need to see, which would be many, many things including but not limited to effect uniformity, effect accuracy, transmission, thickness, thickness uniformity, QC procedures, rate of rejection, etc. etc.

I am as guilty as anyone else, but I also think we are overthinking this a bit considering the application is a tiny 1/2.3" 12MP sensor haha.

I also found this interesting - the glass is finished poorly on one filter, but not the other:

Mavic air long exposure ND filter - ND1000

why don't you just buy one and take a closer look. the adhesive on PP

The takeaway is basically don't buy no-name garbage (those have very noticeable effects on image quality that you can see without any special equipment, at least in the DSLR world) and you're probably fine. With DSLR filters though, there are enormous price differences - you can buy $8.00 filters and $300 filters that claim to do the same thing, so finding the point of diminishing returns is more important if you have 10+ lenses you need filters for. With drones, (at least looking at the Mavic Air options) the prices are so low even for the 'best' filters, that it's safer not to cheap out, at least IMHO.

Also, we're talking about a tiny 12MP 1/2.3" sensor here - not a 46MP Full Frame DSLR sensor. The threshold for required quality is not going to be the same. If there were a big price difference in Mavic Air filters, I would be putting more effort into the decision process. The Polar Pros are cheap enough that I don't really care, but if that may change if I go with a larger sensor drone in the future. You are also paying for their lifetime warranty somewhere in that price, but so far it's reasonable.

you should buy both brands and compare. grab a magnifying glass and you will be surprised. you remind me of folks who claim nikkor lenses are always sharper than tamrons. so i got both and although the tamron 17-50 might not be as fast (focus) and with harsher bokehs, but they are very sharp. you should also check out the PP carrying case. the outside looks cool but the inside is just another low quality stuff held together by velcro.

 

[CanadaDrone]

why don't you just buy one and take a closer look. the adhesive on PP



you should buy both brands and compare. grab a magnifying glass and you will be surprised. you remind me of folks who claim nikkor lenses are always sharper than tamrons. so i got both and although the tamron 17-50 might not be as fast (focus) and with harsher bokehs, but they are very sharp. you should also check out the PP carrying case. the outside looks cool but the inside is just another low quality stuff held together by velcro.

The equipment needed for objective optical testing is unbelievably expensive...I think I'll pass An optical bench is around $200K USD. Also, if you are reading my posts, I have not said anything is better than the other - quite the opposite actually, in that I have said that they may very well be the same, but we have seen no evidence of that. You cannot evaluate optical performance with a magnifying glass...

The Tamron 17-50 is a nice lens (though I don't know what version you're talking about as there are several), but the nice thing about camera lenses is that objective testing exists from reputable sources for most lenses these days, so there isn't really any debate on which lenses are sharper than others anymore, if that is the only lens quality important to you. Anyone who tells you X brand is always sharper than another brand either does not know what they are talking about or does not care about objective testing. So, I am not sure how I remind you of those people when I have never said anything even close to that, and in fact have suggested the opposite. Again as I have said before, this is a tiny, low resolution sensor we are talking about here.

This whole thing started because Skyreat claimed their filters are the same as Polar Pro, but can't seem to produce any unbiased data showing that. Everything originates from themselves.

I don't have the PP carrying case so I cannot comment on that product. IT could very well be garbage, but I wouldn't know.

Also look how the edge is finished on that ND1000 - I asked for an explanation and Skyreat ignored me:

http://cdzlf.img48.wal8.com/img48/526895_20150903231639/152775339309.jpg

 

[Drone Master]

Yah, we actually are not owned by DJI....where did you hear that from? I havn't signed anything to give up interest of the company

Also you are correct, you pay for our name, the same name you will be calling for help on filter selection, warranty, tips on capturing better content, developing out a filter calculator app, and even the name you call for a refund if you don't like the product. We are here as a resource for the entire industry whether they choose to purchase our brand or not

Let me re phrase by asking you one question.
Why are your filters retailed on the DJI Store and no other is aloud?
You must have signed something with them. Actually that was a year or two ago.
We are happy that you got in with DJI, however many of my clients still say your products are way over priced because of the DJI brand. Prove it like Skyreat and drop the prices of your products,
Perhaps a sale or giveaway might solve the debate.

 

[Slowcaptain]

At least some one is making a genuine effort to show proof.

 

[Drone Master]

At least some one is making a genuine effort to show proof.

Not Polar Pro based on this thread.....

 

[CanadaDrone]

At least some one is making a genuine effort to show proof.

They aren't, really. None of what they posted proves anything except that they are capable of 2 minutes of data entry in Excel. They also did not post most of the data variables we asked to see, and have conveniently ignored questions regarding poor product finishing on photos they posted themselves in more than one thread. The company claiming they are better than another cannot also be the company supplying or funding the data that supposedly shows that...that is one of the most basic principles for providing credible data.

Maybe they are better than PP, maybe they aren't - I don't really care beyond the fact that I'd like to see a claim like the one they made supported with unbiased data.

If someone else posted a screen shot of some raw data in an extremely basic Excel spreadsheet tomorrow that "one upped" them, would you believe their filters were better?

Not Polar Pro based on this thread.....

PolarPro isn't the one making any claims either way, so why would they need to post anything? Skreat is saying their filters are better, and therefore the burden of proof lies entirely on them.

 

[PolarPro]

Let me re phrase by asking you one question.
Why are your filters retailed on the DJI Store and no other is aloud?
You must have signed something with them. Actually that was a year or two ago.
We are happy that you got in with DJI, however many of my clients still say your products are way over priced because of the DJI brand. Prove it like Skyreat and drop the prices of your products,
Perhaps a sale or giveaway might solve the debate.

Our filters are also sold in BestBuy and they do not own us
DJI believes in our products so they offer them to their customers.

We sell a premium product at a premium price point and our customers that expect that.
-Jeff from PolarPro

 

[PolarPro]

Not Polar Pro based on this thread.....

Im a little confused.....what are we trying to prove here....?
-Jeff from PolarPro

 

[Jameslavis]

Skyreat doesn’t really have a website nor Likeky a person on North American soil. I actually don’t know what they specialize in. I’m doubting they are well know in dslr lms for top quality optics.

 

[Skyreat]

Skyreat doesn’t really have a website nor Likeky a person on North American soil. I actually don’t know what they specialize in. I’m doubting they are well know in dslr lms for top quality optics.

This kind of "top quality optics" is already mature in the market. The filters are very simple products ,Do not make it so mysterious and complicated. This is not the same thing as a digital camera lens. About this fitlers ,You only need to find a good optics glass supplier and a metal processing factory , then you can make this kind of product, this is a totally processing craft, these "top quality optics" are not produced by you, the frame is not too, So do not say that you are very professional ! !

 

[Jameslavis]

This was the type of post I thought they would toss back. It’s perfect. So basically, we aren’t in the photography game but we grab the stuff and put it together. Then say, we use the same stuff as the companies like polar, probably look or lift their materials from the factory.

So where is skyreat’s euro or North American office? Website?

 

[bullbloke]

This debate is interesting but I do feel lost track of the subject a bit. Polar Pro is a well known manufacturer of quality filters since a long time now. They don't have to prove quality nor their customer service. Reputation speaks by itself. It does not mean that the other brands are bad either. It's a question of budget to my opinion. If you go with polar pro you will have an excellent customer service afterward, and the quality is guarantee. This may not be always the case with the others. It does not mean that they can't improve afterwards either. There have been a couple of Skyreat reviews out there, I like this one

Polar Pro has not been always very good in their design, I recall the first initial set of filters for the Mavic pro, which they corrected quite rapidly, and as far as I recall, they also supported their customer to rectify the error cause by the first set. Now also point to note, polar pro app is a must have for anyone.

 

[stberlin]

The PGY-TECH filter also has the same build quality as the PolarPro or Skyreat. I do like the case batter than Polarpro, though. It's made in tin and not cheap plastic that scratch or break easily like the PolarPro.

This case came with the ND64 filter. it has 4 extra cutouts for your other filters so you can keep everything in one case --perfect for my ND4, ND8, ND16, and ND32 filters.

 

[stberlin]

btw, the PGY-TECH filter is much thinner in profile than the PolarPro or Skyreat

 

[CanadaDrone]

View attachment 40590
The PGY-TECH filter also has the same build quality as the PolarPro or Skyreat.

Some of the Skyreat filters have a poorly finished rough edge around the glass, the Polar Pros do not that I have seen so far.

 

[msinger]

Some of the Skyreat filters have a poorly finished rough edge around the glass

Got any photos of your poorly finished SKYREAT filters? What kind of negative impact has that had on your photos/videos?

 

[CanadaDrone]

Got any photos of your poorly finished SKYREAT filters? What kind of negative impact has that had on your photos/videos?

Skyreat posted the photos themselves, if you've been following along, and I've asked them at least 3 times now for an explanation but they have conveniently ignored me each time. A rough edge like that could definitely have an impact on optical performance depending on how light is entering the lens. It's also just bad quality control.

Anyway that wasn't the point - someone above said the filters are made the same and if one has a rough, poorly finished glass edge and the other does not, the build is not identical.

 

[msinger]

A rough edge like that could definitely have an impact on optical performance depending on how light is entering the lens.

Ever see any reviews complaining about such a thing? I haven't.

 

[CanadaDrone]

Ever see any reviews complaining about such a thing? I haven't.

I can't have a constructive conversation with you if you aren't even going to read my posts. Happy flying.