I think paying through paypal is safer. At least the credit card numbers aren't expose directly to the merchants.
B+W UV Filter Justified?
- Thread starter Jagdeep
- Start date
- Status
So Canon filters are all made using Canon glass? hmm.. read from somewhere that canon filter is actually made by 3rd party vendors..? no?
B+W worh the $$ , replaced all my hoyas to b+w hahaha, but only if the lens price ratio is there 
easier to clean,
brass rim,
nice words writen on the filter hehehe (inside the filter and around)
easier to clean,
brass rim,
nice words writen on the filter hehehe (inside the filter and around)
B+W worh the $$ , 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.
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...
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...
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....
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....
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.
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 )
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
)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.
- Status
