Need some protection for the new L glass I got. Both are roughly the same price on Amazon - is there a difference?
Printable View
Need some protection for the new L glass I got. Both are roughly the same price on Amazon - is there a difference?
Both use top-quality glass (Heliopan = Zeiss. B&W = Schneider) and both are excellent. But this opinion is based on experiences from 20 years ago and things may have changed.
Skip UV filters entirely. Waste IMHO. You end up shooting L-glass through a filter that's not nearly as good.
If you have flat quality optical glass with a little coating, it is every bit as "good" of glass. Hoya, Schneider, and Zeiss provide most of the optical glass out there that goes into the lenses you buy.Quote:
Originally Posted by truth
Multicoating is what matters most when sticking additional glass on the lens.
B+W, Heliopan,and Hoya (even Tiffen) are fine as long as you get some nice multicoating. I use all three and even Tiffen on some filters that I don't care as much about.
I've had my 70-200 saved by filter. A $45 filter is cheaper than paying Canon $200 for a new front element. UV0 is also nice for when shooting outside in the winter because if gives you a second chance when you get snow on the front element that melts then freezes (pull the filter, keep shooting). It also preserves your front element's coating from repeated cleanings.
That said, lens hoods are 100X more important than UV filters.
Lenses (70-200 f/2.8 IS, 16-35 f/2.8) came w/hoods. I disagree with you on not using some kind of filter, C but understand your concern - that's why I limited the choice to the best optical glass (ground - not cut, multicoated.) I've always used B+W, but had a friend at work kinda sneer and tell me to sack up and get Heliopan.
I've done more research and it seems like arguing between Henckels and Wusthof knives. They're basically the exact same thing, made across the street from one another using the same process.
Sack up and get Cutco.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tippster
Good analogy. Filters are alot easier to clean nasty dust off of than lensesQuote:
Originally Posted by Tippster
Heh. That is quite a sack DOWN. My next set will be Victorinox' Fibrox chef's knives. Cheap and amazing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit
I have had good luck with my b+w but as you found you're really spliting hairs. Sack up and get some shun's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit
I have used both on L glass and if there is a difference between the two, I couldn't tell it by looking at the pictures.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tippster
I currently don't own any Heliopans, but I remember that they were not as robust as their B&W counterparts. Not that they were delicate, just thiner (thinerer?) than my B&W filters. So, if strength is an issue (i.e., there is a potential for some abuse), perhaps it would be prudent to invest in the B&W filters.
Hoyas work fine for me. Agree with the usefulness as a "tear-off" in adverse conditions/avoiding repeated cleanings when windy.
Filter JONG bump -- have some fancy glass coming my way and thought this thread would be all I'd need to protect my neck, but whaddya know, there are many many types of B+W UV/haze filters. Damn capitalism...
So what do I need to be on the lookout for? Is multi-coated ("MRC") what I need to look for? Any pointers to help manage the overwhelming sense of choice?
Whats santa bringing BK?
I believe the B&Ws have better-quality filter rings than the Hoyas, which makes getting them stuck on the lens (or even temporarily stuck) less likely. The filter threads are my one complaint with my Hoya filters, FWIW.Quote:
Originally Posted by 54-46
Oh, and 95% of the time I agree with the theory that putting a filter in front of a good lens is useless at best; I only put the UV filters on when I'm going into a situation I regard as particularly hazardous, like shooting rally racing.
24-105 f4L and 70-200 f2.8 IS (both used off fredmiranda)Quote:
Originally Posted by squirrelmurphy
:biggrin:
I feel like I can usually get by with the lens hood but at least for now wanna try out the filter route. You know, kinda like until you get that first core shot...Quote:
Originally Posted by anotherVTskibum
fun! 24-105 is a cool range to have.
Yeah, I know. I'd been pondering it for a while -- I like the range of my 28-135 but didn't use it much since I got the 17-40 and got spoiled by its much better image quality and vibrant colors. In retrospect I should have pulled the trigger on it back in the days of 35% live.com cashback on eBay, but there are decent deals to be found from people parting out the 5DmkII kits
Don't waste your cash on those. They are over-priced, and over-rated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tippster
Just get a Hoya Super HMC (S-HMC) UV(0) and be done with it.
I got my 24-105 from someone's 5DII kit as well. I love it on my XTi, such a fun range. I was worried about missing the wide end and constantly switching to my 17-40, but I haven't regretted it one bit. It's allowed me to get in a lot closer with my pictures, and hopefully make them more interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigKuba
I went with the B+W. Every Hoya filter I've ever owned ended up rattling in its housing. Also back wen I bought them the Hoya was only $5 cheaper - now it's $19. Ah well, I'm happy (and the brass ring threads really nicely without binding on the lens.)Quote:
Originally Posted by AstroPax
Why the hell would the 5D MkII guys part out that lens? I love mine - it's really versatile, and with the IS it's just as fast if not faster than an f/2.8...?
both offering same price.