Which are better-reg. B+W filters or Hoya HMC filters?

[chip j]

I have a range of both in 46mm for black & white work w/my Contax G Zeiss lenses. Which would you use? Thanks, Chip

 

[miha]

B+W are the easiest to clean plus the rings are made of brass.

 

[Oldwino]

Another vote for the B+W. The only filters I use now.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

You are paying for the name and a bit of manufacturing nous.
In the end... filters are just glass, it's the manufacturing and finishing that makes them. And the name. Just like a BMW or a Benz.
I use both Hoya and B+W, plus Kenko Zéta — these are the only three I will use because of my experience with them over a 30 year period.
The most expensive is a $445 B+W Kaesemann POL; historically I've lost 2 of them but none other...

 

[Xmas]

The rubber hood and brass filter allow you to drop the camera and buy a new filter rather than replacing lens the rubber normally is ok...

 

[StoneNYC]

B+W for everything except circular polarizer, for that use the Nikon circ pol 2 version, they are just a tiny bit better. But everything else use B+W

 

[Alan Gales]

I've got a Nikkor polarizer probably like Stones. It's a thin sucker. I also have various B+W's and Hoyas. I've standardized on 77mm so they aren't cheap. I purchased most of mine slightly used off Ebay and saved a lot of money.

 

[Pioneer]

I have some very nice Zeiss filters, some very nice Waltz filters, Ektalite, Leica, B+W and Hoya.

When I am shooting modern lenses I typically use modern filters, if I need one.

But if I am shooting vintage lenses I often use the filters that were original to that glass.

Lots of companies have made very high quality filters over the years.

But, more to the point of the OP's question, I like B+W for their mounts, but Hoya also makes very nice filter glass.

 

[miha]

I would say a polarizer should have brass rings, not aluminium. The reason is that aluminium tends to stick to the lens filter thread and is then difficult or close to impossible to remove because it's very hard to grab the inner ring. Brass is self lubricating so it never "glues" to the lens or to another filter if you stack them.

 

[Pioneer]

Same Old Fight

Same old battle that has been happening since after WWII.

Japanese vs German.

Hoya vs B+W

 

[miha]

Same old battle that has been happening since after WWII.

Japanese vs German.

Hoya vs B+W

Well, there is also Heliopan, equally good.

 

[Pioneer]

Well, there is also Heliopan, equally good.

Yep, most of them are very good. Kind of like lenses anymore. The differences are actually pretty minimal.

I do agree that brass mounts are usually preferred to aluminum when working with polarizers, but I just looked at my Hoya 77mm Hoya POL and it has a brass mount.

If it is very inexpensive and is being sold on E-Bay then you may want to go somewhere else. But it is becoming harder and harder to really detect any differences between any of the major filter manufacturers. Unfortunately even the prices are getting closer and closer.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

live is too short for cheap glass.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I've used Hasselblad,NikonB&WHoya and Tiffenfilters;never saw or feltany differenceother than that Hasselblad filters don't seem to stay put.

 

[AgX]

How they are made, see this thread:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[chip j]

Great video! I know B+W glass is better, but I wondered if MC would give the Hoyas an edge; my pro friend in NYC (over 20 yrs exp.) seems to think so. Thanks for the replies.

 

[Pioneer]

You know, I know that this has been said over and over again. So often that people pay it no attention. But it is true.

The minor differences visible in most quality lenses, or filters for that matter, have nowhere near the effect on your image as your technique does. If you are shooting handheld then the cause for any differences you find are so variable that it is impossible to know what caused it.

If you wish to spend money on B+W filters go for it. They are lovely and are certainly high quality. You will not be disappointed. Of course they won't change your photograph much either but, what the ...

Ralph, life is much too short to worry about whether your filter, lens or camera is the best that can be found. Buy what you need...or want, and take pictures.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

You know, I know that this has been said over and over again. So often that people pay it no attention. But it is true.

The minor differences visible in most quality lenses, or filters for that matter, have nowhere near the effect on your image as your technique does. If you are shooting handheld then the cause for any differences you find are so variable that it is impossible to know what caused it.

If you wish to spend money on B+W filters go for it. They are lovely and are certainly high quality. You will not be disappointed. Of course they won't change your photograph much either but, what the ...

Ralph, life is much too short to worry about whether your filter, lens or camera is the best that can be found. Buy what you need...or want, and take pictures.

Oh my god! Hush! You want to shut this site down from lack of posts and questions? You keep this up and people will start using their cameras more and posting here less!

 

[StoneNYC]

Oh my god! Hush! You want to shut this site down from lack of posts and questions? You keep this up and people will start using their cameras more and posting here less!

What did I miss I was too busy shooting my new lover with my yashika44LM with no filter at all...

(Yeayea not LF but you get the point).

 

[chip j]

I posted a legitimate technical question. Apparently some of you Yahoos aren't up to the task.

 

[StoneNYC]

I posted a legitimate technical question. Apparently some of you Yahoos aren't up to the task.

I thought my original answer was semi-legit, the better glass in the B+W I suspect will be better than the multi-coated filters.

 

[Pioneer]

I posted a legitimate technical question. Apparently some of you Yahoos aren't up to the task.

You're right. We must not be.

Of course, I thought we did answer. Your Hoya's AND your B+W's are equally useful for what you intend to shoot.

In order to answer definitively you would need to test each type of filter separately. I remember a test of different UV filters that can be found here: http://www.lenstip.com/113.1-article-UV_filters_test.html

But, of course, this won't tell you which of the other types of filters are any good.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I thought my original answer was semi-legit, the better glass in the B+W I suspect will be better than the multi-coated filters.

All Hoya, B+W, Kenko and Tiffen filters are multicoated. Each and every manufacturer has their own proprietary methods and reasoning, and it does pay to read carefully, especially if you have invested a huge sum in a lens that for all intents and purposes will do better without any filters stuck on the front (especially Chinese crap). Filters are not so much items of floss and fab: they do have to minimise compromising lenses which are highly corrected (apo, asph.) — and saying one filter is better than another at this is heretic: you simply don't know and in the shop you must have some form of experience and education to guide you. Putting a non- or monocoated filter on a $5,000 highly corrected lens will effectively hobble it because it will introduce spurious uncontrolled reflections between the front element and the filter — that's one of the reasons filters have anything from 4 to 12 layers of coating.

 

[StoneNYC]

All Hoya, B+W, Kenko and Tiffen filters are multicoated. Each and every manufacturer has their own proprietary methods and reasoning, and it does pay to read carefully, especially if you have invested a huge sum in a lens that for all intents and purposes will do better without any filters stuck on the front (especially Chinese crap). Filters are not so much items of floss and fab: they do have to minimise compromising lenses which are highly corrected (apo, asph.) — and saying one filter is better than another at this is heretic: you simply don't know and in the shop you must have some form of experience and education to guide you. Putting a non- or monocoated filter on a $5,000 highly corrected lens will effectively hobble it because it will introduce spurious uncontrolled reflections between the front element and the filter — that's one of the reasons filters have anything from 4 to 12 layers of coating.

Single coated.... $40

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11974-REG

Multi-coated.... $70

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11994-REG

Slim Multi-coated... $115

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/132978-REG

There's a difference, he's asking do I buy the lesser expensive single coated B+W or the more expensive Hoya multi coated version (which is cheaper than the B+W multi-coated).

 

[AgX]

Putting a non- or monocoated filter on a $5,000 highly corrected lens will effectively hobble it because it will introduce spurious uncontrolled reflections between the front element and the filter — that's one of the reasons filters have anything from 4 to 12 layers of coating.

-) anti-reflection coating on the front of a filter will have no effect other than yielding higher tramsmittion. (Unless one uses a sun-shade with high reflective inner...)

-) stray light originating from the front element of a lens is already highly reduced by the coating of that lens. Coating of the backside of a filter would only reduce reflection of the already reduced reflection from that group or out of the rest of the lens.

-) in doing this the filter is in no more prominent position than any other element. It's effect thus has to be related to the many other surfaces of a lens.