Filter Question...Need some specific insight

[freelanceshots]

I looked at the last photos that were shot of the light in the ceiling and the MRC filter and the non filter shots look almost identical. The non MC filter does show more problematic areas and more haze. Am I seeing this right?

[neuroanatomist]

I looked at the last photos that were shot of the light in the ceiling and the MRC filter and the non filter shots look almost identical. The non MC filter does show more problematic areas and more haze. Am I seeing this right?

That's my take. In my experience as well, B+W MRC vs. no filter doesn't look significantly different - that's why I pay $70-100 for each B+W UV filter. Also, it's not just the number of coatings - the quality of the coatings (and glass itself) makes a difference as well. A quick search on Amazon shows a "Zeikos 77mm Multi-Coated UV Filter" for $8 - I would bet that even a single-coated B+W filter would be much better.

[Kayaker72]

I looked at the last photos that were shot of the light in the ceiling and the MRC filter and the non filter shots look almost identical. The non MC filter does show more problematic areas and more haze. Am I seeing this right?
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

That is what I am seeing too.


Regarding the MRC vs "no UV filter": At an angle, I actually think the picture is a bit better with the MRC filter (less haze at the top lip), but for all intents and purposes, they are the same. Going straight into the light thepicturesare alsovery similar. The differences may be due to a slight angle change (note the corner of the shelf and some of the patterns in the ceiling) due to my less than professional test. But with the MRC I notice afaint partialhalo just beneath the light and just slightly more "haze" to the top left of the light.


But getting back to your point, to me, the canon UV filter (no MC)really stands out as significantly worse while I'd consider the B+W MRC and the "no UV filter" pictures to essentially be the same.

[freelanceshots]

Thanks for the help and responses. I appreciate it. Next is to buy one of these super expensive, mack daddy B + W pol filters and try it side by side to the other one. I

[Daniel Browning]

If you don

[freelanceshots]

I thought about that but did not see at B&amp;H or Adorama if B+W makes a slim mount 82mm linear polarizer. I just looked where I did not see one. Shopping for filters at these online stores it kind of confusing. They have all these filters with many different prices where some say coated glass, some say multicoated glass, some say MRC coated glass and they all are Kaesemann. Then there is the thin glass and then there is the wide angle slim mount and then the regular mount. How do you know what you

[freelanceshots]

Just looked at B&amp;H again and the offer a B+W 82mm Kaeseman Linear Polarizer Glass Filter (Extra Wide) for $244.00. Can

[Daniel Browning]

I wish I could be more help, but I can

[freelanceshots]

if you don

[neuroanatomist]

Can't find or understand what the explanation for the term Extra Wide means. From what I've understood in the past the slim mount is the one for really wide angle glass

B+W mounts are as follows:

• Standard (aka F-Pro) - 5 mm thick, has front threads (standard CPL is 8 mm thick)
• XS-Pro - 3.4 mm thick, has front threads
• Slim - avoids vignetting by being thin, 3 mm thick, no front threads (Slim CPL is 5 mm thick)
• Extra Wide - (referred to as oversize in the B+W handbook, but EW on the B+W web catalog), avoids vignetting by having larger diameter glass, 5 mm thick (I think), has front threads, filter glass is wider than lens thread (e.g. a 77mm oversized filter will have 77mm threads on the lens end, but the filter glass, and the front threads, will be 82mm).

So, the slim mount will generally do a good job at preventing vignetting, but the extra wide filter will do an even better job and is useful in cases where even a Slim filter would cause vignetting. I don't think you'd need an extra wide for any Canon lens, more likely for a wide angle medium format lens or a view camera.


Regarding the various types (and prices) of polarizing filters, the linear polarizers are always cheaper than the circular polarizers within a given mount size and optical quality. Mount sizes increase in price from standard to slim to extra wide. Optical quality increases in price from non-MRC to MRC toK&auml;semann. There are some gaps (e.g. none of the linear polarizers have the MRC coating). There's often a big jump from standard/slim to extra-wide, because the EW filters have larger diameter glass which adds a lot to the cost.


There's a description of their mounts, except the XS-Pro which is somewhat new, and more information including tables of which filters are available in which sizes and mounts, in the B+W Filter Handbook.