Does anyone else not use mulitgrade filters?

Nicholas Lindan said:

The cheapest filters one can find work just as well as the most expensive. That filters can be sold at the price of a good prime lens is an example of ... well, fill in the blank with the appropriate phrase.

Click to expand...

Isn't putting a cheap filter on to a good prime lens rather akin to fitting remoulds to a Maserati? Most of the time they'll be fine, but sooner or later there'll be a day when you'll sure be glad you went for the Michelins or Bridgestones.

Back to multigrade filters - supposing you had an enlarger capable of accepting filters in the drawer or under the lens and you had both styles of filter sat on your darkroom shelf - which would you use?

Best wishes,

Steve

P.S. - As for the bumblebees, it's all to do with them not having read the book that proves they can't fly!

Steve Roberts said:

Isn't putting a cheap filter on to a good prime lens rather akin to fitting remoulds to a Maserati?

Click to expand...

No. False analogy. Bad rhetoric and prejudice do not substitute for reality.

Buy the cheapest filter you can find. Buy the most outrageously priced filter you can find. Take pictures through both and see if you can tell the pictures apart.

Cheap filters do, however, have really horrid soft aluminum threaded rings. And that's a valid reason for buying a good filter - though nowhere near justifying the asinine price.

Steve Roberts said:

supposing you had an enlarger capable of accepting filters in the drawer or under the lens and you had both styles of filter sat on your darkroom shelf - which would you use?

Click to expand...

I do and I do. I use under-lens filters because they are much more convenient and have no effect on image quality. Apo-Rodagon lens, if you are asking.

Nicholas Lindan said:

Buy the cheapest filter you can find. Buy the most outrageously priced filter you can find. Take pictures through both and see if you can tell the pictures apart.

Click to expand...

Coatings can make a difference in some situations, especially when talking about multicoated filters and uncoated or single coated ones.

Tim Gray said:

Coatings can make a difference in some situations, especially when talking about multicoated filters and uncoated or single coated ones.

Click to expand...

I prefer the B+W series of filters, mostly due to improved build quality over the more basic units. The threads come on and off the lens cleanly, without jamming.

Tom

Nicholas Lindan said:

Buy the cheapest filter you can find. Buy the most outrageously priced filter you can find. Take pictures through both and see if you can tell the pictures apart..

Click to expand...

I see you're an advertiser - you don't by any chance sell cheap filters, do you???
(only kidding and I genuinely don't know what products or services you sell!)


Out of interest, I looked at what Ilford have to say on the subject:

"If your enlarger lacks a filter drawer, you will need to use mounted filters, by sliding them into an adaptor under the lens."
..... which I read as "best option,filter drawer"

Then, supporting Nicholas' opinion:
"The optical quality of the filters is high, so they may be used anywhere in the enlarger light path."

But also:
"If you use them below the lens, you must handle them with particular care to avoid finger marks and other blemishes."
So if they aren't new and/or perfect (which I'm sure all of ours are!) they're better off "up top".

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/aboutus/page.asp?n=117

I guess we must all pay our money (or not in the case of cheap filters) and take our choice!

Steve

I'd just like to say thanks to those who mentioned split grade printing. I looked up the article by Les McLean and, consequently, I just had my most productive print session and achieved my best print to date. So, Thanks!