Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 34 of 34

Thread: B+W UV Filter Justified?

  1. #21

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    I think paying through paypal is safer. At least the credit card numbers aren't expose directly to the merchants.

  2. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Singapore, Bedok
    Posts
    1,129

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    So Canon filters are all made using Canon glass? hmm.. read from somewhere that canon filter is actually made by 3rd party vendors..? no?






    Quote Originally Posted by Dream Merchant View Post
    Allow me to throw a spanner in the works...


    Concept 5 - If I'm spending that much on a filter, I'd rather get a manufacturer's filter

    Originally, people only bought B&W as an alternative to buying a Nikon or Canon filter because B&W were still cheaper, but now that the prices are so close, it doesn't make sense to get a B&W when I can get an original which has the (supposedly) same optical quality glass and coatings as my own lens. Also bear in mind that there was a lot of talk about different grades of B&W filters in the open market so how do we know for sure we're only getting the top quality stuff?


    Aside - I've found that oil and finger-print smudges are just as easy to clean on a Nikon and Canon filter as a B&W. Pentax SMC filters were more problematic - like Hoya.

  3. #23
    Senior Member StrifeYun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Rivervale Drive
    Posts
    2,216

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    B+W worh the $$ , replaced all my hoyas to b+w hahaha, but only if the lens price ratio is there

    easier to clean,
    brass rim,
    nice words writen on the filter hehehe (inside the filter and around)
    Canon EOS "Luxury"
    [flickr]

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by StrifeYun View Post
    B+W worh the $$ , replaced all my hoyas to b+w hahaha, but only if the lens price ratio is there

    easier to clean,
    brass rim,
    nice words writen on the filter hehehe (inside the filter and around)
    As said, we pay for what we get.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  5. #25

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    hey guys,
    so how about hoya filters?
    do they degrade alot?

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by blackdrakes View Post
    hey guys,
    so how about hoya filters?
    do they degrade alot?
    Nope. The Pro 1 digital series is pretty gd, quite close to B+Ws.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    most multi-coated filter perform very familiar to each other under normal shooting situation, its only under extreme situation where strong light source is pointing directly at the lens then one will see some difference... in those extreme cases, i rather don put on any filter...
    Last edited by ExplorerZ; 16th March 2008 at 08:13 PM.

  8. #28

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jagdeep View Post
    Just wanted to know if such an expensive filter would make a difference for an average camera.
    You sort of answered my quetion.
    I think I will get it.
    thanks
    jag
    IMO, you should get quality. The R1 may be not be an SLR but the IQ certainly matches them.

    B+W, or any of the top draw multi-coated, e.g. Hoya/Kenko Digital Pro 1 should be suitable.

    I'm rather sorry I sold my R1...

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    1,639

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    Today I took my 70-200 /4 L out. I found a 67mm Vitacon C-PL filter and plonked it on. Got to the place (outdoors) took out the 40D with the 70-200 and guess what? It looked absolutely blurry. I had changed my focussing screed to the EF-D just last night and my first thought was ... huh focussing screen not in position properly, so I open the thing and reposition the focussing screen and guess what still the same. Then I change lenses to the 17-40L (which has a B&W and a Tokina C-PL) and it was nice and sharp. Then I thought, shucks, don't tell me this 70-200 has a loose element or something, then I decide to take off the filter - and it was nice and sharp.

    I thought back .... I had not used the filter for a while, but a few years ago, when I did with my 24-85, the long end (85mm) shots were often fuzzy and I always thought - camera shake ... now I know .. it is the filter...

    I get home and I try the filter with a couple of lenses. At normal/wide angles (50mm and below) the blurring is not evident/noticeable in the viewfinder. But at 200mm, boy is it fuzzy.

    I am now very fearful of low quality filter and I am going to test some of my other filters to ensure the degradation is small. I know that my B&W and Tokina are fine as I have used them a lot and always have pin sharp shots.

    I think CPLs are probably more susceptible to poor quality - because there are 2 glass elements and they actually do more than usual filter by polarising light.

    So time to get a good C-PL - but B&Ws CPLs cost like $200 up....

  10. #30

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by bomby929 View Post
    Yes.. I also just got a B+W 67mm at $79. Only trust B+W and the Nikon NC.. since NC no have for 67mm.. go with B+W.
    Nikon NC is available in 67mm diameter. I have one on my 18-70 kit lens.

  11. #31

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon View Post
    Nikon NC is available in 67mm diameter. I have one on my 18-70 kit lens.
    I know.. that time they out of stock..
    Nikon D90

  12. #32

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by bomby929 View Post
    I know.. that time they out of stock..
    Oh okie.. Actually I did a reflection test for NC and Hoya Pro1D, they seem to be very similar with the Hoya Pro1D reflecting a bit less than NC. Cast is quite neutral with NC reflecting slightly more green-cyan and Pro1D reflecting a bit more magenta-blue.

    I'm beginning to feel that Pro1D might be the way to go because it's much cheaper. And unlike Hoya HMC Super Pro1, the Pro1D is much easier to clean also.
    Last edited by lsisaxon; 31st March 2008 at 01:40 PM.

  13. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Alexandra
    Posts
    267

    Wink Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    The difference between the B+W and most other filters is the way they are manufactured. B+W casts a cylinder of galss and slices each filter off the end (like cutting a sausage). Most others cast a plate of glass and cut from the plate (like cookie cutting).

    Theortically, a pinpoint flaw that you might not see in your filter would be easier to detect in a cylinder (like a small ripple) and as such the QC is higher. and so is the price.

    You can get flawless quality in either.

    (I have both )

  14. #34

    Default Re: B+W UV Filter Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by ballwackers View Post
    The difference between the B+W and most other filters is the way they are manufactured. B+W casts a cylinder of galss and slices each filter off the end (like cutting a sausage). Most others cast a plate of glass and cut from the plate (like cookie cutting).

    Theortically, a pinpoint flaw that you might not see in your filter would be easier to detect in a cylinder (like a small ripple) and as such the QC is higher. and so is the price.

    You can get flawless quality in either.

    (I have both )
    I don't think reputable brands like Hoya and Nikon will cut from a plane glass. Usually from a block, cut to diameter and then sliced and finished. It is almost impossible to guarantee the planeness and flatness of the surfaces of the plate so you can't just cut filters out like that.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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
  •