Slim or Regular B+W Kaesemann Filter? Does anyone have advice or an opinion on this regular Kaesemann Circular Polarizer vs. the SLIM version which is roughly the same price?
746652
I've owned both the Polarizer and 010M filter for the Canon 24-105 MM and can guarantee you will see vignetting at 24mm with the Polarizer and a slight darkening with the 010M (UV) filters. The slim filters are the way to go if you're going to be shooting anything at below 28mm. The B&W site goes into a bit more detail on what length vignetting becomes an issue but in my experiments with the 24-105 anything below 35mm using the Polarizer will vignette. If you're not planning on stacking filters (which is generally a bad idea with L glass anyway) I'd go with the thin filters and just change them out as needed. I leave the Slim Polarizer on my 17-40 mm about 85% of the time.
707253
Let me quote Tiffen (go to their website's FAQ section): "The Tiffen Circular Polarizer is not multicoated at all. We used to carry TMC (Tiffen multicoated) filters but found no significant difference in their light transmission and also that the coating could be easily damaged, resulting in poorer performance. In any case, multicoating is a proprietary process, and we seriously doubt that any lens or filter manufacturer will tell you the exact nature and composition of their coating layers."
1630106
Thanks a lot Mark, that surely makes a great feedback for me, really appreciated.If i read you well, i think i will go for the 70-300 IS USM, provided i can be confident Portrait Blurring is solved once for all.On another note, is it true that the 70-300 has background blur (nice effect) due to some magnetic field ... ! ! and finally, is it true you cannot use a polarizer on.how much would you sell your 70-300 ?thanks for the support,Emile-.
741649
Bought this a long time ago, but have not used it much - CP filters are very "personal" - you like them or you don't - Some are warmer, some cooler, and the more expensive ones usually don't seem to change the relative color intensities like many of the cheaper ones (which can make the whole picture seem quite artificial). I'm afraid it's pretty much trial and error trying to find something that you prefer. Sorry I can't be of more help.
1822083
Sorry, I don't have the Kaesemann Circular Polarizer with Multi-Resistant Coating. Just the B=W 77 UV filter.
327498
Yes! Polarizers are used with ND all the time. Sometimes even to add additional density, and sometimes for the actual polarization. Vignetting is always a concern, but reasonably correctable in post processing.
334177
You need a UV filter. Trust me, better for a $10 UV filter to get scrtched then your lens. And a circular polarizer is a must have especially since your shooting water shots.
1607624
As trivial as it may seem, don't skimp on a filter. You have a nice camera, so get a MULTI-COATED filter from someone like B&W, Heliopan, or Hoya. The multi-coatings reduce flare and reflections, just like your multi-coated Nikon lens -- again, don't skimp, it'll truly reduce the quality of your photo's especially in sunlight. The size of the filter should be imprinted on the lens, and yes, it's 67mm. A good filter is somewhere in the $50 neighborhood.
290515
Hi Chris, I just tried to measure mine. Of course it is difficult to do. I tried to stick a mm rule into one of the pockets. It measures an easy 9.5 cm...but that would not account for the thickness of your filter. With my 77mm polarizing filter...I could MAYBE squeeze in another 5.6 mm of diameter...but I'm thinking yuou could not jamb an 88 or 89 in. In any case. I really like it and you can't beat the cost...but I just don't think it would work for an 88mm plus. Best. Rish
502285
I erroniouslly purchased the non coated version for my wife. She is a sunrise/sunset photographer. The non coated version allowed significant lense flare when pointed into the sun. While on vacation, we met another photographer who had the coated UVA filter. She had the same problem we did, only bought the MRC and hasn't had a problem since. I have since purchased a B+W UVA MRC filter for her, among other stupidly expensive filters, but I have wasted enough money buying items "on the cheap" for her hobby to know that you get what you pay for. I buy B+W exclusively for her 5D Mk ii and L series lenses.
55639
As everyone else said the ring gets screwed to camera lens. Use UV filter to protect camera lens. Polarizer filter makes sky bluer and cuts glare on water. Florescent filter makes that type of light more natural. The macro filters can be used 1 at a time or 2 or more. Practice with them until you get the look you want. I haven't used the hood yet. Just try all the pieces and see the outcome. Have fun!
1679789
The short answer is you need both. Circular Polarizers allow you to control glare and light diffusion - in other words, when you turn the filter, you can darken the image or lighten the image, as well as reducing glare from reflections or increase the "blue" in the sky as well, among other things. If you're going to take outside pictures in daylight - especially around reflective surfaces such as glass, metal or water - then having one of this is critical. However, Circular Polarizers (when rotated properly) will slow your lens down by 1-2 stops, so you only want to use them in brightly lit situations where glare, etc., is present. UV filters originally reduced ultraviolet coming into the lens in order to cut down or eliminate a "blue cast" on film, as well as to protect the very expensive "glass" at the front of your lens from getting scratches from constant cleaning. UV has long stopped being a problem, so now these filters are used primarily to protect the glass at the front of your expensive lens. They keep dirt, dust, finger oil and debris from touching your actual lens, so you never have to clean the lens itself... which means your lens will never develop scratches. UV filters are cheap to replace (by comparison to lenses and Circular Polarizers). They don't affect the speed of your lens, nor do they affect the color your lens "sees". I would suggest, though, that you get a good multicoated UV filter so ghosting and other reflective problems don't occur. All Circular Polarizers are already multicoated, so that's not a problem with them.
759242
If anyone is interested I have a 24-70L 2.8 Canon Lens. I only use it about 5 times total. 6 weeks after I bought it I purchase the 24-105 IS Canon Lens because I shoot mostly Wedding & Party's. The 24-105 IS works much better for the type of photography I do. I would sell it for $900.00 and include the B&W; UV Filter which is the top of the line brand filter which is made in Germany. Plus $25.00 for shipping. You can email me at rjgphoto@sbcglobal.net if anyone is interested.
1049050
I'd go with a much stronger filter. 1.8 maybe. Don't stack you'll just be begging for light scatter shooting in to a light source like that.
646577
In days past Tiffen was a good quality middle of the road (cost) filter. They've cheaped them up to point I wouldn't own one. Hoya is a similar filter. The best filter's I've used over last 45 years are by B + W.
1449655
Why the heck is it so hard to find filters for the SS-700?! I also bought the wrong ones, they all look the same but size is just a bit off. Did you ever figure out what filter number fits the 700? Thanks!
2110807
I'm just a user and can only give an opinion .... Here goes ... I really like my unit. It works well for me. It's a few years old and there may be better Updated units available. I bought it for the Ziess lens. I did have to go to the internet for my software as I had purchased a referbed unit on line for $50 bucks. So I got a good price and use it every week. Peter