[PNF]

Lets not kid ourselves. You spent $1K, 2K or even $3K on your lens alone and a good filter would not only provide an extra layer of protection that your hood cannot protect from, but also reduce glaze/UV/light, enhance color contrast/light, depending on the types of the filters.

I thought it is a good idea to start a thread that talks about JUST FILTERS ONLY!

This thread would serve as an general info thread for those who are looking for a set and cannot justify the price difference between brand name vs ebay-no name ones. (Price range from $20 to $300+)

Please feel free to post your own review/feedback on some of the filters you have.

---------------------------

I'll start.

I'm currently ooking at some CPLs right now and still not sure if I should pull the trigger on the maxsaver B+W slim MC CPL at $167.50. ($150 ish after cash back)

.. or just stick with Hoya at half of the price...

B+W 77mm kaesemann MRC SLIM Circular Polarizer Filter ($160)

http://cgi.ebay.com/B-W-77mm-kaesema...d=p3286.c0.m14


Hoya 77mm HD Digital CPL. ($100)

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-HOYA-77mm-HD...d=p3286.c0.m14

Key features:

25% higher light transmission than standard polarizing film used in current photographic filters




Filter promotes the acquisition of more light for your image

Increases sharpness

This filter eliminates ultraviolet rays to remove haze from outdoor shots as well as polarizing the light to remove reflections, and increase color saturation, without affecting the overall color balance

[radiantm3]

You can look at it from the other side as well. You spend over a grand on quality lenses for better image quality. Why add another layer of glass to possibly negate that? I'm not saying it's true or not, but just something to think about. I don't use uv filters anymore. Just lens hoods if I worry about protection. I only use filters if it's necessary for a particular shot (polarizing, neutral density).

[PNF]

Originally Posted by radiantm3

You can look at it from the other side as well. You spend over a grand on quality lenses for better image quality. Why add another layer of glass to possibly negate that? I'm not saying it's true or not, but just something to think about. I don't use uv filters anymore. Just lens hoods if I worry about protection. I only use filters if it's necessary for a particular shot (polarizing, neutral density).

I beg to differ. With Canon lens (not sure about Nikon), even with L series lens, you will still get UV glare on the lens and the filters are to reduce those glare. Then again, I do agree that the difference may not be as noticeable, especially when you're shooting directly under the sun outdoors.

Also, the filter lens protects your lens glass scratch not by accidents, but protects it from possible scratches caused when you are cleaning your glass. You DO have to clean your glass sometimes, and the filter is just an extra layer of protection. (I'm sure we all use those microfibre cloth or lens-specific cleaning equipment, but you could still scratch your lens with it if you accidentally, say, catch a couple larger dusts in your cloth and you use it to clean your glass?)

I would definitely use some filters on my lens, but I am not too sure about justifying spending $160-200 on one or a $80 one would suffice.

I definitely wouldnt get those $10 ebay ones as they are just plain glass that does nothing to your lens/photos and they probably increase the glare than reduce it.

[888]

I have some Tiffen filters that they sold me from Adorama, should I throw them away? Or are they ok?

[jon@karbonwerke]

PNF, the B+W and Hoya will both do the job. The main difference seems to be ease of cleaning, with the B+W being easier to clean than the Hoya. I'd rather not have to spend extra time cleaning when I could be shooting, especially if timing is critical...i.e - shooting during "golden hours" using the rising/setting sun as light source. That's just me though, and your shooting conditions might differ from mine. Hope that helps

[vachss]

Quality of filter does matter in the eventual image quality, both in the optical uniformity of the substrate (for maintaining sharpness) and in the quality of the coating (to suppress flare). That said, while I find it fairly easy to see the difference between a cheap no-name (Quantaray et al.) and a decent quality mid-priced B+W, or Heliopan, I don't really see much difference between the mid-priced filters and the top of the lines (which usually have the same substrate, but better coatings). Other folks may come to other conclusions, but that's what I actually see.

As a result I have a collection of mostly B+W and Heliopans - A/R coated, but not the super MRC - I just can't tell the difference.

Another key is to always use your lens hood - that will do lots more for flare suppression than that last expensive 0.1% in antireflection coating performance on your filter.

[PNF]

Originally Posted by jon@karbonwerke

PNF, the B+W and Hoya will both do the job. The main difference seems to be ease of cleaning, with the B+W being easier to clean than the Hoya. I'd rather not have to spend extra time cleaning when I could be shooting, especially if timing is critical...i.e - shooting during "golden hours" using the rising/setting sun as light source. That's just me though, and your shooting conditions might differ from mine. Hope that helps

Originally Posted by vachss

Quality of filter does matter in the eventual image quality, both in the optical uniformity of the substrate (for maintaining sharpness) and in the quality of the coating (to suppress flare). That said, while I find it fairly easy to see the difference between a cheap no-name (Quantaray et al.) and a decent quality mid-priced B+W, or Heliopan, I don't really see much difference between the mid-priced filters and the top of the lines (which usually have the same substrate, but better coatings). Other folks may come to other conclusions, but that's what I actually see.

As a result I have a collection of mostly B+W and Heliopans - A/R coated, but not the super MRC - I just can't tell the difference.

Another key is to always use your lens hood - that will do lots more for flare suppression than that last expensive 0.1% in antireflection coating performance on your filter.

Thanks for your experience feedback.

The 10% ebay cashback sale is until 8/17. I am fairly certain that I'm pulling the trigger on the Hoya one, instead of the B+W one. Either one should be good enough for my amateur casual shooting and I can save the $60.

I actually have not come across with people using Heliopans myself. Most people I know uses Tiffen/Hoya/B+W for their filters.

[PNF]

Originally Posted by 888

I have some Tiffen filters that they sold me from Adorama, should I throw them away? Or are they ok?

Tiffens UV filters? They are decent. I actually have that on my 70-200 f4 IS right now, since I dont use my 70-200 as much. But I am thinking to upgrade them pretty soon during this sale.

[TL]

Hey Billy - how are you getting the 10% cash back on ebay?

[888]

Originally Posted by PNF

Tiffens UV filters? They are decent. I actually have that on my 70-200 f4 IS right now, since I dont use my 70-200 as much. But I am thinking to upgrade them pretty soon during this sale.

yes, uv, they said I should just leave them on the lens at all times.

thanks

[PNF]

Originally Posted by TL

Hey Billy - how are you getting the 10% cash back on ebay?

go to bing.com

search for "Hoya Polarizer".

You should see a ebay link on the top, click on the link, and buy from that page.

You need to have paypal to receive the cash back.

I have received at least around $200 in cash back over the last couple months on my lens/misc accessories on my camera.

[radiantm3]

Originally Posted by PNF

I beg to differ. With Canon lens (not sure about Nikon), even with L series lens, you will still get UV glare on the lens and the filters are to reduce those glare. Then again, I do agree that the difference may not be as noticeable, especially when you're shooting directly under the sun outdoors.

Also, the filter lens protects your lens glass scratch not by accidents, but protects it from possible scratches caused when you are cleaning your glass. You DO have to clean your glass sometimes, and the filter is just an extra layer of protection. (I'm sure we all use those microfibre cloth or lens-specific cleaning equipment, but you could still scratch your lens with it if you accidentally, say, catch a couple larger dusts in your cloth and you use it to clean your glass?)

I would definitely use some filters on my lens, but I am not too sure about justifying spending $160-200 on one or a $80 one would suffice.

I definitely wouldnt get those $10 ebay ones as they are just plain glass that does nothing to your lens/photos and they probably increase the glare than reduce it.

I never said UV filters are bad. If you need it to reduce glare, then fine. I was just giving my thoughts on the subject. I've heard plenty of pro photographers say it's ridiculous to put cheap UV filters on L glass. I'd rather use a lens hood for protection/glare reduction and buy other gear with the money saved. But that's just me.

[1013mm]

Originally Posted by radiantm3

You can look at it from the other side as well. You spend over a grand on quality lenses for better image quality. Why add another layer of glass to possibly negate that? I'm not saying it's true or not, but just something to think about. I don't use uv filters anymore. Just lens hoods if I worry about protection. I only use filters if it's necessary for a particular shot (polarizing, neutral density).

+1.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by radiantm3

You can look at it from the other side as well. You spend over a grand on quality lenses for better image quality. Why add another layer of glass to possibly negate that? I'm not saying it's true or not, but just something to think about. I don't use uv filters anymore. Just lens hoods if I worry about protection. I only use filters if it's necessary for a particular shot (polarizing, neutral density).

Stock lens coatings are not designed for all circumstances. If they came with a UV coating, they'd by useless for UV photography. If they came with a polarizing coating they'd use needed light and not see through some other polarized surfaces.

Having good, high quality filters and using them appropriately maximizes the effectiveness of you images.

If you're going to use a UV filter to protect the lens, then get one that actually works and is as good a quality as your lens. I use Hoya HD because the mounts are thin, the glass is top quality and they actually work. (I've seen test of some of the no-name generics and they were merely glass, with no UV filtering capacity. Member is of photo.net can see for themselves).

I keep my UV filter on my "walk around" 24-105 f4L IS because the lens sees lots and lots of action and the image quality is good, except in certain side light where it'll add to flare, even with the hood on. (I always use the hood). My 400mm f5.6L takes the same filter, but I only use it when the light requires it. The hood sticks out about 3" beyond the glass, giving ample protection. With the tele, the subject is usually pretty close, so haze is not an issue.

Dave

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by radiantm3

I never said UV filters are bad. If you need it to reduce glare, then fine. I was just giving my thoughts on the subject. I've heard plenty of pro photographers say it's ridiculous to put cheap UV filters on L glass. I'd rather use a lens hood for protection/glare reduction and buy other gear with the money saved. But that's just me.

PNF and I are using high quality UV filters. I think he would agree with me that a cheap UV filter on L glass is downright stupid. A lens hood only protects from side light entering the lens and causing flare and other issues.

BTW, you don't use a UV to reduce glare, it reduces haze. A polarizing filter is great for glare, like on the water or reflecting of shiney objects.

Whether you leave it on or not, I can't imagine any serious photographer not owning a high quality UV filter and a polarizing filter. Depending on types of shots, even ND should be in the bag.

Thanks goodness, all the B&W filters can now be done in digital processing.

Dave

[PNF]

Originally Posted by dcstep

PNF and I are using high quality UV filters. I think he would agree with me that a cheap UV filter on L glass is downright stupid. A lens hood only protects from side light entering the lens and causing flare and other issues.

BTW, you don't use a UV to reduce glare, it reduces haze. A polarizing filter is great for glare, like on the water or reflecting of shiney objects.

Whether you leave it on or not, I can't imagine any serious photographer not owning a high quality UV filter and a polarizing filter. Depending on types of shots, even ND should be in the bag.

Thanks goodness, all the B&W filters can now be done in digital processing.

Dave

Ahh, oops, I thought UV would reduce BOTH glare and haze.. ok, guess I learn something yet again!

I tend to agree with Vachess that you can definitely see a difference between low end (say dolica $10 ones) vs a high end say, B+W ones; however, we can argue that we probably see little difference between a medium (say Hoya/Tiffen) vs a B+W. Of course, there are different grades within each brand as well, but just saying this in general.

I do agree that I'd want to save as much as I can on the filters without compromising the shots or something that would actually work so that I can spend this money else where.

$150 - 200 filters are quite pricy if you ask me.


PS. I have just pulled the trigger on the Hoya HD CPL and it comes to $96.30 shipped for a 77mm!!

I think I should be happy with the decision.

I'll take some Comparison shots in the future and post it here!!

Stay tuned.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by PNF

PS. I have just pulled the trigger on the Hoya HD CPL and it comes to $96.30 shipped for a 77mm!!

I think I should be happy with the decision.

I'll take some Comparison shots in the future and post it here!!

Stay tuned.

That's a great filter. I bought mine in the Carribean for around the same price.

I think you'll be happy. The best test will be of a mid-day scenic, where you can see the haze. It will not clear the LA skies, but it will deal with lesser haze.

Dave

[TL]

Originally Posted by PNF

go to bing.com

search for "Hoya Polarizer".

You should see a ebay link on the top, click on the link, and buy from that page.

You need to have paypal to receive the cash back.

I have received at least around $200 in cash back over the last couple months on my lens/misc accessories on my camera.

i heard about that from fatwallet but didn't think it was still going on. cool thanks

[PNF]

How do you tell the authenticity of the filters when you receive them?

I would think the replica nowadays are extremely close to the real thing just by looking at them. I guess the only way is to see the glass's performance and see if they actually work?

I'd hate if by trying to save $20-40 buying from ebay, and I get something that I could have gotten for $20 elsewhere....

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by PNF

How do you tell the authenticity of the filters when you receive them?

I would think the replica nowadays are extremely close to the real thing just by looking at them. I guess the only way is to see the glass's performance and see if they actually work?

I'd hate if by trying to save $20-40 buying from ebay, and I get something that I could have gotten for $20 elsewhere....

Like any Ebay transaction, you need to really study the seller's feedback and, perhaps, even call to see if you can get a good vibe.

There was a supplier of trumpet mpcs, selling for about 10% of normal US retail. They were clearly ripoffs, but people were raving about them on one of the trumpet forums. They were so cheap that I ordered three, including two of the same model. None of them fit properly into the trumpet and the two that were supposed to be the same were not. They were basically worthless and I slammed them in a review. Would you believe, people came to their defense and still raved about theirs.

I've had many great experiences on Ebay, but it IS buyer beware and dealing with Asian and Indian based sellers, triple caution is advised.

Dave

[PNF]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Like any Ebay transaction, you need to really study the seller's feedback and, perhaps, even call to see if you can get a good vibe.

There was a supplier of trumpet mpcs, selling for about 10% of normal US retail. They were clearly ripoffs, but people were raving about them on one of the trumpet forums. They were so cheap that I ordered three, including two of the same model. None of them fit properly into the trumpet and the two that were supposed to be the same were not. They were basically worthless and I slammed them in a review. Would you believe, people came to their defense and still raved about theirs.

I've had many great experiences on Ebay, but it IS buyer beware and dealing with Asian and Indian based sellers, triple caution is advised.

Dave

Well noted and I do that on all my ebay transactions.

I guess people still have to defend that they are not fools buying those MPCs.

Still, even with reputable seller. (in this case, I bought from MaxSaver), how do you tell authenticity? Ripoffs are easy to spot, but what is hard to spot those items that still demand 70-80% of the MSRP and are seemingly good deals at valid discounts..

I actually have a 67mm B+W UV filter from Maxsaver, but the box is so ordinary and I see the B+W UV logo on the lens and all, but just cant really tell if what I have is authentic or not. Because it is a UV filter, it is hard, at least for me, to tell the difference.

Oh well, just a thought.

[samandy121]

Tiffen filters are good. Why you want to throw them?