Rectangular Filter Reviews

[HDNitehawk]

Good info, but it should be pointed out the articles you are linking to are somewhat dated. For example the CPL tests were done in 2008. The B+W Slim KSM C-Pol MRC 72mm was rated #1. There have been newer releases by B+W with new technology applied so one might read this article and buy this CPL and think they bought the best B+W makes, which 5 years ago it probably would have been but not today.

[Kayaker72]

Good point Rick. I just picked up a B+W UV filter with their "nano" technology.

[HDNitehawk]

Good point Rick. I just picked up a B+W UV filter with their "nano" technology.

I own the 82mm version of the B+W Slim CPL that is rated second on the list and a 77mm normal one. I bought a B+W 77mm XS-Pro/Nano-MC Kaseman last July and I think it is much better than the old versions I have. Better color and better Image Quality. I don't know if it is the Nano technology or if it is somehting else.

Of course you know the reason I read the article was to see if there was another magical CPL out that was better than what I have. Fortunately I didn't find one to add to my want list since I already had the best on their list.

[Kayaker72]

Brant: I would be interested to hear your thoughts of the Z Cokin vs. the Singh-Ray after you have a chance to look them over. When I bought mine it was the Cokin P series I bought, you could see the difference in quality just holding the product in your hand.

Rick

Hi Rick,

I've been playing with the filters off an on for a couple of weeks now and I agree, there is a quality difference. But I am not sure if it is optical or significant enough me to spend the extra $ on Singh-Ray.

First, filters I currently own:



The top row from left to right is the Cokin 1 ND, Singh-Ray Soft Grad 2 ND, Cokin 2 ND, and Cokin 3 ND.
Bottom row is a B+W 72 mm CPL, Formatt Hitech 3 stop solid ND, and the B+W Grad ND 102 (2 ND).

One thing that jumps out is that I am not quite comparing apples to apples as the Cokins have a much harder edge and the Singh-Ray is definitely has a soft graduation. Also, there is a slight color change between the different filters.

The Singh-Ray has slightly less flex, is a little thicker, has polished edges and rounded corners. All and all, it is nicer:

Left is the Singh-Ray and right is the Cokin (both 2 ND)

[Kayaker72]

But overall, the physical quality of the Cokin Z line (these are all Z121's purchase as part of the U960 kit) isn't to the point where I am put off. But I've read that cokins can impact color a bit, so I created my own homemade test. All shot in the same conditions and settings:

No Filter:


Cokin 2 ND


Singh-Ray 2ND

[Kayaker72]

I am still working on some real world comparisons, here is my first set:

Newport Bridge, Newport RI

No Filter:


Singh-Ray 2 ND:


Cokin 2 ND:


The biggest difference I see is between the harder vs softer graduation of the filters. I can post 100% crops, if anyone is interested, but they are very comparable. I didn't see any image degradation due to the filter.

I am also playing around with whether it is easier to get the grad filter effect in camera vs in PP. Thus far it seems that minor adjustments may as well be done in PP, but for 2 ND or more, detail is lost (shooting at the sun), in which case, it is better to get in camera. I am also liking being able to see the capture shot while still in the field.

So I am still deciding what I am going to do. Right now I am kicking around the idea of sending the Singh-Ray and Hitech back and ordering a Reverse Grad ND. But I might keep the Singh-Ray as I can see having a harder and softer graduated ND filter.

BTW, I did look at the number of stops. At least holding them up to my 7D, The cokins are pretty accurate (3 ND was 2 2/3, others dead on) and the Singh Ray is only 2 ND at the very top of the filter.

[conropl]

Brant:

Thanks for the comparisons. However, I would think that if there was a difference it would be more likely to show up in high contrast situations which is where they are most like to be pulled out and used. The best examples would be sunsets and sunrises. The bridge example above does not have a real large contrast variation from sky to water because it looks like it is shot in good light with the water well lite. So I guess I wonder which produces the most flair looking into a sun at the horrizon (foreground relitively dark or shadowed compared to the sky). The other test is when the sun is below the horrizon (or only a small portion showing), does the filter create bad fringing around the shadowed areas (tree branches, sharp edges from buildings, etc.)?

I have Cokin, and I bought them so I could get something other than silhouettes when looking into the rising or setting sun. I bought Cokin at the time because all the catalog places were out of everything, and I found a set at a camera shop in Traverse City... so I bought what they had left. The main problems have been flair and fringing if the sun is still above the horrizon. If you try to keep the sun out of the shot, then you loose a lot of the great color. So I was currious whether the Singh-Ray was better for the more high contrast type shot?

Pat

[Kayaker72]

Hi Pat,

I agree. I'll try to fit in some of the tests you suggest soon. Some may be a little tough. I haven't found too many convenient locations for sunsets, etc. But I am planning on testing flare/sun in the shot today.

Thanks,
Brant

[HDNitehawk]

Brant; maybe it is exposure, or maybe it is color. The Singh-Ray seems to have a color closer to the no filter picture. The Cokin is either brighter or washed out. Notice the deep blue color of the water on the bridge picture. The bridge in the Cokin doesn't appear as sharp but I am on a small monitor and didn't zoom in.