Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: B+W 77mm Kasemann Slim Cir-Pol

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    39

    Default B+W 77mm Kasemann Slim Cir-Pol

    Greetings all,

    How easy is this guy to clean? I know that this Polariser isn't MRC so I was just curious as to how easy it is to clean. I love how easy the B+W MRC filters are easy to clean/repel marks.

    Out of interest, does the Nikon version do just a good a job as the B+W?

    In Australia I can get the B+W cheaper then the Nikon but not as cheap as in Singapore.

    regards

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,881

    Default

    My advise is to get the Nikon, B&W Kesemann quality is not as great (especially the Kasemann Slim). Nikon Cir II is better in terms of coating and finishing. It is also very slim.
    I ordered a B&W Kasemann slim and had to reject it because of coating and finishing. Currently using the Nikon and never regret it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Huynhie
    Greetings all,

    How easy is this guy to clean? I know that this Polariser isn't MRC so I was just curious as to how easy it is to clean. I love how easy the B+W MRC filters are easy to clean/repel marks.

    Out of interest, does the Nikon version do just a good a job as the B+W?

    In Australia I can get the B+W cheaper then the Nikon but not as cheap as in Singapore.

    regards

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
    Posts
    12,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis
    My advise is to get the Nikon, B&W Kesemann quality is not as great (especially the Kasemann Slim). Nikon Cir II is better in terms of coating and finishing. It is also very slim.
    I ordered a B&W Kasemann slim and had to reject it because of coating and finishing. Currently using the Nikon and never regret it.
    Kaesemann used to be very good, in terms of quality and worksmanship.

    But of recent, the worksmanship is kinda let down.

    Nikon's newest CPL, Nikon CPL-II, is the slim version. Excellent finishing/worksmanship and picture quality.

    The next step down is B+W MRC CPL.

    In term of cleaning, the B+W is slightly easier to clean than Nikon, but both are easy to clean of any stains.

    As for quality, I find that the Nikon's better than B+W MRC by a bit.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Huynhie
    Greetings all,

    How easy is this guy to clean? I know that this Polariser isn't MRC so I was just curious as to how easy it is to clean. I love how easy the B+W MRC filters are easy to clean/repel marks.
    Not sure how easy the Kaesemann are to clean as I am still waiting for mine to turn up, has been order since the first week of Dec.

    I just had a look at the price list from Mainline Photo (Aust dist for B+W) and they only list Circular Polariser Kaesemann MRC filters

    It looks like the Linear Polariser Kaesemann are available in standard and MRC.

  5. #5

    Default

    My understanding is that Kaesemann PL is weather sealed, meaning that fungus and moist will not get in btw the PL that easily. Kaesemann is the top model in B+W, and I don't understand here why some say the MRC B+W PL is better.

    Nikon 77mm with 82mm diameter lens one is the best PL filter I have ever seen. Heavy and solid...
    DR KOH KHO KING

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
    Posts
    12,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kho King
    My understanding is that Kaesemann PL is weather sealed, meaning that fungus and moist will not get in btw the PL that easily. Kaesemann is the top model in B+W, and I don't understand here why some say the MRC B+W PL is better.

    Nikon 77mm with 82mm diameter lens one is the best PL filter I have ever seen. Heavy and solid...
    In terms of absolute quality and worksmanship, the Kaesemann CPL is better than the MRC CPL. And yes, Kaesemann is weathered sealed. But of late, the newer batch is disappointing in terms of worksmanship and the weather seal capability. And of course, the image quality of Kaesemann CPL still rocks over the MRC CPL.

    As for the Nikon 77mm with 82mm diameter, that's the CPL-I, and yes it's one of the best CPL.

    Upon comparison with CPL-II, CPL-I is still slightly better, albeit marginal. But the problem is that one can't put the hood with the 82mm diameter.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,881

    Default

    As what AJ had mentioned. The Kasemann used to be one of the best but not sure what happen recently the quality seems to have dropped. Once you take a look at it you will understand why. You are also correct to say that Kasemann is weather sealed but currently the quality does not seems to be on par.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kho King
    My understanding is that Kaesemann PL is weather sealed, meaning that fungus and moist will not get in btw the PL that easily. Kaesemann is the top model in B+W, and I don't understand here why some say the MRC B+W PL is better.

    Nikon 77mm with 82mm diameter lens one is the best PL filter I have ever seen. Heavy and solid...

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Thanks for your input guys,

    The problem I have is that the Kaesmann slim will only cost me AUD290 where as the Nikon CPL II is likely to cost around AUD400. The Australian distributer for B+W (Mainline) is one of the better for pricing compared to the other photo distributers around here, eg I can get 2 gitzo 1325 delivered from just about anywhere around the world for the price on one in Australia.

    Ebay is showing a brand new Nikon CPL II for AUD210, I'll just as well take your collective advise! Thanks.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    39

    Default

    I just completed a transaction for the Nikon CPL II upon your collective advise, total price AUD229.49

    james m,

    did you purchase your Kaesemann directly from Mainline? How much did you pay through them?

  10. #10

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by AJ23
    In terms of absolute quality and worksmanship, the Kaesemann CPL is better than the MRC CPL. And yes, Kaesemann is weathered sealed. But of late, the newer batch is disappointing in terms of worksmanship and the weather seal capability. And of course, the image quality of Kaesemann CPL still rocks over the MRC CPL.

    As for the Nikon 77mm with 82mm diameter, that's the CPL-I, and yes it's one of the best CPL.

    Upon comparison with CPL-II, CPL-I is still slightly better, albeit marginal. But the problem is that one can't put the hood with the 82mm diameter.
    AJ, you seems knowledgeable about Nikon CPL II. how much light reduction?

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Outside the Dry Box.
    Posts
    16,268

    Default

    just asking... anywhere in sg sell the kaesemann version?

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reachme2003
    AJ, you seems knowledgeable about Nikon CPL II. how much light reduction?

    You loose approximately 1.3 stops

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
    Posts
    12,716

    Default

    reachme2003: Huynhie has answered ur question.

    DCA: CP used to have them, but now u gotta check there for availability, but it's not cheap, it's at least >S$400 for 77mm.

  14. #14

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by AJ23
    reachme2003: Huynhie has answered ur question.

    DCA: CP used to have them, but now u gotta check there for availability, but it's not cheap, it's at least >S$400 for 77mm.
    Huynhie, AJ, to confirm that it is approx. 1.3333 stops reduction. however, i read recently that espn said it is 1/3 stop reduction(0.3333 stop).

    maybe there is a typo error somewhere?
    Last edited by reachme2003; 7th January 2005 at 01:40 PM.

  15. #15

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by reachme2003
    Huynhie, AJ, to confirm that it is approx. 1.3333 stops reduction. however, i read recently that espn said it is 1/3 stop reduction(0.3333 stop).

    maybe there is a typo error somewhere?
    upz for confirmation pls.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
    Posts
    12,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reachme2003
    upz for confirmation pls.
    It should read 1 1/3 stop.

  17. #17
    Senior Member sammy888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    1,568

    Default

    No answer yet? I was a bit sad to heard about the QC drop for the Kasemann after being a owner and big fan of it. Wasn't going throw in my two cents but since no answer yet....

    I lost my Kasemann CP quite sometime back (stolen lens) but it is comparable with my other B+W CPs as far as I recalled and it is about 1.3 stops. Just did a test on my CP.

    For one thing..if the polariser was 0.3 stop..you will not notice much of a dark tint on the filter itself. I have used quite a number of brands and all are dark tint by the very nature it is part of the material used to create that effect.
    Last edited by sammy888; 8th January 2005 at 09:53 AM.

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
  •