I have always used B+W filters as I think they are one of the best but the shop I am about to purchase new gear from wants me to try Rodenstock filters. They claim that the quality is as good or better.
Anyone have experience using both or Rodenstock? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated...
[]
I don't know about the image quality, but I was pushed that way, and I tried one, and I just didn't like the feel of the threads. They felt cheaper. I don't know if that's a valid point for you, or not.
The B+W glass looks visually nice, though I've seen, in very high contrast scenarios, (flashlight on my head aimed at the glass with darkness behind it) what seem like imperfections in the glass, though under normal situations I can't see any problems at all.
I don't like the feel of the Tiffen filters either. It's not a snob thing, but for me, part of the enjoyment of taking the picture is the feel of the camera. It's probably a bad idea for me to ever try a 1 series, because I very simply couldn't buy one.
I've never tried a canon filter. Somebody at Adorama told me that they were made by Tiffen, in which case, the build quality isn't as good, though the polarizing filter seemed to do that job just fine.
I don't know if they are in fact made by Tiffen.
Its really hard to know the quality of the glass, if you want to be sure that quality is good perhaps the high price compare :P
I guess you won't really realize any practical difference image quality wise. I know B+W filters are just about the best filters available, if I ever need a nice filter I'll just get myself B+W filters. However, sometime I really feel that the filter is merely a protection and as long as it's multi-coated it won't be dreadfully bad. I use HOYA Super-HMC filters on most of my lenses as they're half price of the B+W MRC's, but did I notice any difference between HOYA and B+W, not really... But for some people, the brand name and peace of mindwill be wellworth the extra money.
I have 2 B&W UV filters and 1 B&W ND filter. All three are perfect and don't seem to affect image quality in the slightest. However, I thought I'd try a (much cheaper) Tiffen ND filter (that was a bit stronger than my B&W one), and it turned out to be awful. I couldn't take a sharp picture with it no matter what I did. I manually focused, auto focused, and even set up controlled tests comparing the B&W filter to the Tiffen one, and the Tiffen pictures paled in comparison. I sent the Tiffen filter back for a refund.
Why put a cheap, inferior quality filter on a great quality lens? It just doesn't make sense.
Originally Posted by Sean Setters
We all hate cheap Tiffen stuff... For a ND or CPL filter I'll have B+W for sure. But the topic does seem to involve Tiffen. Good Rodenstock filters as far as I know is not bad at all (though not tried myself), in fact it should be able to stand against B+W in quality. I agree B+W is the ultimate choice, however, if you can ever find any IQ difference between HOYA Super-HMC UVfilters and B+W MRC ones, do show some real life pictures to tell. So far I failed to see any IQ difference between the HOYA Super-HMC and B+W MRC UV filters. Since I cannot distinguish any difference, I'm happy with my HOYA Super-HMC filters and save the money for something else[]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote