Who produces the best filters?

[Ko.Fe.]

What time of day?

I think, I reached it by noon or so.

Some notes from friendly Canadian site
http://www.mountainnature.com/Photography/

 

[narsuitus]

I use a variety of filter types. I use glass, plastic/resin, and gelatin/acetate filters. I have been told that a high quality gelatin filter effects image sharpness less than a high quality glass filter or a high quality plastic resin filter.

I own and use the following filter brands which vary in quality from bargain quality to high quality:
Arona
Asanuma
B+W
Cokin
Contax
Hoya
Kenko
Nikon
Promaster
Tiffen
Vivitar
Quantaray

The brands I like the most are:
Contax (best protective filter I have ever seen)
Nikon (especially the polarizing filter)
Tiffen (especially FL-D used to correct color film white balance)
B+W (especially the 4-star cross special effects filter)
Hoya (especially the R72 infrared filter)

Budget priced filters I like are:
Vivitar soft focus
Coken graduated neutral density (acceptable for black & white images but not color)



Filters and Holders by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[Slixtiesix]

I think B&W, Heliopan and Hoya are about equal. Filters from Rollei, Hasselblad etc. are often just rebranded products from these manufacturers (mostly B&W I guess).

 

[macfred]

I use primary B&W and Heliopan filters (UV, ND, ND grad., yellow, orange, red, green, KR 1.5) in various diameters (35.5, 52, 62mm) - I'm quite satisfied.
I can't see anything wrong with my Zeiss Ikon Stuttgart in S35.5 (female thread - yellow, orange, green, UV) for the Super Ikonta III 531/16.
Worth mentioning : I have two Zenza Bronica filters in 67mm (use them for my FUJI GW670III and GW690) - Yellow I and Yellow II - those are recommendable.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Which brand of filters have the least affect on lens sharpness?

I find, all brand names are very good. B&W probably have the best reputation.multi-coated filters re better than no coating and glass filters are preferred over plastic. I use Hoya or Tiffen because to me , they are the best value for money.

 

[faberryman]

Unfortunately, there is probably not an independent review of filters laying out out the comparative quality among brands. I would stick with the usual suspects. I use B&W, but I only have five filters - yellow, orange, red for B&W contrast, and two neutral density, all in 77mm, plus a few filter adapters for various lenses.

 

[David T T]

I use whatever tests best, and its not always B&W. For my UV filters, I went with Hoya due to that lenstip site article linked previously in this thread.

 

[George Mann]

Coken graduated neutral density (acceptable for black & white images but not color)

What makes them not suitable for color?

 

[jim10219]

I'm sure there are poor and great filters out there. And I'm sure some will test much better than others in a controlled laboratory. But in my own personal experience with filters in real world scenarios, they're pretty much all the same. I have a bunch of 52mm UV and Red #25 filters from brands like B&W, Hoya, Vivitar, KnightX, etc. It seems like every time I buy a new lens or camera, I get a new 52mm Red #25 and/or UV filter with it! One day I decided to put them through their paces. Even when shooting resolution and color charts, they all pretty much perform the same. There were occasionally some extremely minor differences between them that you really had to pixel peep to see. But most of the time they were indistinguishable. The biggest differences between any of them is whether or not they are coated, and that rarely becomes and issue in most real world environments (assuming you have a lens hood and aren't taking shots of sunsets, or sunrises). Though if you are planning to use it for scenes where flare might be an issue, then I definitely wouldn't skimp on the coating! I will also say that I have a Neewer GND filter that has a dark spot on it that came from the factory like that. So there's definitely a quality control issue to consider. Though at 1/10th the price, you could probably throw out quite a few and still save money.

Maybe other people have other experiences, but I don't worry about filter brands near as much as I do other things, and I use filters quite a bit. I've seen a few samples online of how cheap filters can ruin a shot, and I have to wonder which cheap filters they were using, because none of mine have ever been anywhere near that bad! Remember, there aren't that many factories in the world making filters. So the generic ones are mainly going to be rebranded versions of more expensive ones, perhaps minus a coating or something.

Of course some people don't mind paying more for piece of mind. I know a few people whom it would really bother to use a cheap filter due to that nagging feeling in the back of their minds telling them the shot is already compromised before they even shot it. So if you're one of those people, then a top of the line filter is money well spent.

 

[Leigh B]

Of course some people don't mind paying more for piece of mind. I know a few people whom it would really bother to use a cheap filter due to that nagging feeling in the back of their minds telling them the shot is already compromised before they even shot it. So if you're one of those people, then a top of the line filter is money well spent.

My focus is trying to achieve the highest possible quality in the final image.

To use a baseball analogy...
If a rookie hits a single in his first at-bat in the major leagues, he's batting 1000.
How many of them are still batting 1000 after five years?

The appearance of the original subject is 1000.
Every step in the photographic process degrades that ideal.
How much depends on many factors, one of which is the quality of the optics.
That's why I always purchase the highest-quality lenses and lens accessories I can identify.

- Leigh

 

[jim10219]

My focus is trying to achieve the highest possible quality in the final image.

To use a baseball analogy...
If a rookie hits a single in his first at-bat in the major leagues, he's batting 1000.
How many of them are still batting 1000 after five years?

The appearance of the original subject is 1000.
Every step in the photographic process degrades that ideal.
How much depends on many factors, one of which is the quality of the optics.
That's why I always purchase the highest-quality lenses and lens accessories I can identify.

- Leigh

I can't argue with that. Though in my situation money isn't unlimited. So I have to make compromises somewhere. My personal experience has shown me that filters are generally a good place to compromise. That gives me more money for film, chemicals, and lenses.

 

[pentaxuser]

What makes them not suitable for color?

I have seen several reports over the years that they are not truly neutral i.e. they have a slight cast. I cannot speak from personal experience.

pentaxuser

 

[Leigh B]

I can't argue with that. Though in my situation money isn't unlimited.

Hi Jim,

That's certainly true in my case, and likely true for almost everyone else here.

That's one reason I learned to repair cameras.
I've bought many "non-working" ones and restored them to original factory specs.
Some I kept and used, but most I sold at substantial profit.

- Leigh

 

[narsuitus]

What makes them not suitable for color?

They impart an unwanted color cast to the images.