Best protection filters to use?

jimbobuk

jimbobuk

Established
Local time
5:54 PM
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
184
I've used various brands of filters on my SLR lenses

Colkin,
Kood,
Hoya

Generally i thought Hoya were the best regarded filters, I see now though that on robert white they recommend and only sell B+W filters

http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/bwfilters.htm

How do these compare to say Hoya's filters.. just interested really, i've only really been into cameras for a few months so far yet but in all that time i'd never really come across the B+W brand.

Cheers
 
B+W are really good, very good coating. I did hear from a local dealer in Bath (UK) last week that following the loss of Sangers the importers that B+W was now hard to get. Maybe RW has taken this over.

The multi coated Hoya filters (coated both sides) should do pretty well. Can't say I've noticed a lot of difference having used both.
 
B+Ws are the best in my experience, brass frames rather than aluminum for better and smoother fit. Glass is first rate, their MRC is virtually invisible.
 
The basic B+W filters are about the same as the best Hoya ones. The B+W MRC ones are even better. Alongside N+W, Heliopan, another german make is also good. IMHO, it is worth the trouble and expense of getting B+W ones. There is a good store on eBay in Germany http://stores.ebay.co.uk/oege-energy-de who carries most of the range and several far eastern stores on eBay carry the more popular ones.
 
Well, the question was "Best protection filters to use?"

The answer is simple. None.

Use filters to 'filter'. Any other time you are needlessly adding two glass/air interfaces and degrading the image.

People pay big bucks for a quality camera lens, then go stick a filter on it for no good reason.

The "protective" theory was foisted off on an unsuspecting public by camera store salesmen who knew a good (profitable) thing when they saw it. The good thing was selling filters (which carry a HUGE markup) to people that didn't need them in the guise of "protecting" the lens.

Tom
 
A lot depends on how you hard you use your gear. I've dented/scratched/cracked/broken at least four or five filters. If they hadn't been there, I'd have lost those lenses. Come to think of it, I've cracked a Nikkor RF 50mm and RF 85mm lens. But without filters, my kill rate would've been four or five lenses higher. (The 50mm still serves pretty well as a photo loupe).

If you use skylight 1a filters, you do slay both dragons at once, because it tends to give a warmer look to color photos. Light yellow for black-and-white work.

I use a mix of B+W and Hoya hmc.
 
Pay now or pay later. I think it's a matter of philosophy. The normal UV filter business is indeed a scam, but then there are people like me who are very a-retentive about their lenses. I use B+W MRC when feasible.
 
the best way to protect your lens is to keep the lens cap on at all times.. and the beauty of the rangefinder system is that it doesn't affect your ability to focus
 
jimbobuk said:
I've used various brands of filters on my SLR lenses

Colkin,
Kood,
Hoya

Generally i thought Hoya were the best regarded filters, I see now though that on robert white they recommend and only sell B+W filters

http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/bwfilters.htm

How do these compare to say Hoya's filters.. just interested really, i've only really been into cameras for a few months so far yet but in all that time i'd never really come across the B+W brand.

Cheers
Click to expand...

I use UV (or skylight) filters - mainly as a prophylatic to protect the primary front glass. I don't expect any additional benefit - if there is one - so be it.

A lot of folks here are "purists" who prefer not such propylactic protection and so will bad mouth UV/Skylight filters. That is a "arbitrary" as those of us who would say "always" use a filter!

I've never "trashed" a lens with a collision such that the "useless" filter "took the hit" instead of the primary glass. But, if and when that happens, I will be glad I put such filters on all of my glass!

To each his own...this is one of those "unanswerable" queries because there really is no "right v. wrong" answer despite what the "hard cores" here will say!

Do what YOU think is best!
 
The best protection, as Brett noted, is a lens cap. Second best is a sturdy lens hood. Any filter, however well coated, will increase the probability of flare to some extent, so it is best always to use a hood with the filter. By the way, coatings on filters are primarily to improve transmission, not to reduce flare.
 
I've used various grades of Hoya as well B+W MRC. If I try to clean a fingerprint with a microfiber cloth, the Hoya coatings seem to just smear more, while the B+W MRC cleans very easily. This is with breathing on the filter first to create some condensation.
 
copake_ham said:
...

To each his own...this is one of those "unanswerable" queries because there really is no "right v. wrong" answer despite what the "hard cores" here will say!

Do what YOU think is best!
Click to expand...

Quite so. People defend their beliefs on this issue with religious fervor. It cannot therefore be argued logically.

However, what makes sense to me, as I have pointed out in other threads, it what Romney states in his basic book on camera repair. To paraphrase, keep the lens clean, don't keep cleaning the lens. Filters certainly help with that.

Myself, I am in the middle, as I have lenses with and lenses without. But my general preference is that I would prefer all my lenses have a protective filter. Just my side of the debate.
 
Best "protection" filters are NONE--use a hood instead IMHO. then you'll neve have to worry that your pic quality is degraded by a hunk of glass that is far inferior to your lens!!!!
 
In an "ideal" clean, accident free enviroment, it would be best not to use "protection" filters. Unfortunately, such a thing doesn't exist IMHO. The modern high tech filters such as the MRC B+W ones probably have better surfaces and optical properties than most of the vintage lenses that we use. In nearly every accurate listing you see it says "light cleaning marks" I have some glass I have been using for 30 years. They don't have any cleaning marks but they have had the filters changed several times. Again IMHO, those cleaning marks are more likely to degrade the image and cause flare than a good modern filter.

However, at the end of the day, it comes down to personal choice and how you use your kit and the enviroment that you use it in.

Kim
 
The (new?) B+W KR 1.5 works very well indeed. Robert White recommended it to me over a normal UV see-through lens cap and they were right.

I can't remember the exact price but maybe about €20 or so.
 
According to several expert on the LUG, it's nor only the quality of the filter glass but also te parallelism.......... or lack of it to the lens glass that is also a major problem.
 
Again, this depends on the quality of the filter. The cheap alloy mounts especially those that use a "spring" to hold the glass can be a problem. The B+W F-Pro mount is carefully machined brass and the glass is held accurately.

Bill58 said:
According to several expert on the LUG, it's nor only the quality of the filter glass but also te parallelism.......... or lack of it to the lens glass that is also a major problem.
Click to expand...
 
I've found that filters constructed of aluminum tend to"weld" themselves to the lens, making removal very difficult. Ones with brass or bronze constrution do not. However, I still carry a filter wrench in my bag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom