Quick review: B+W UV Haze MRC filter

Discussion in 'Photography & Video' started by Hi-tek, May 21, 2009.

  1. Hi-tek

    Hi-tek Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,317
    Ok due to that recent thread about filters and af and image quality...I got paranoid. Debates were flaring up for against filteringing; protect the lens! Or protect the image qual!

    I tried looking for comparisons of my B+W filter and whether thay affect image quality or not. Failing to do so, I decided to take a quick test myself!

    [​IMG]

    I've used this filter for quite some time, however its only recently that I've gotten more serious in my photography. Umm looking at it...you can see the coatings in the reflection, the anodised brass ring is quite solid and err it says Made in Germany...which is a good thing right?

    Shot with a Canon Rebel XT (yes I know its an old pos) with 35mm L f1.4. Auto-focused ISO 100, RAWs used. Only editting consists of cropping and text additions.

    First of a gin bawttel, cropped to 1440x900 because of file size constraints;
    No filter:
    [​IMG]
    Filtered:
    [​IMG]

    100% crop:
    [​IMG]

    Very very slight abberations with the filter on and a tiny loss in sharpness. But this could be from the tripod moving slightly on the carpetted floor.

    2nd test of a knife catalogue
    Without Filter
    [​IMG]

    With Filter
    [​IMG]

    100% Crop:
    [​IMG]

    I can barely tell the difference in this one. And thats a good thing :thumbup: So while there isnt a loss in sharpness from just black and white text, there might be some colour abberations which the coating cannot completely eliminate. That said, its really barely noticeable and the quality does show.


    Ok from this quick test, B+W are that good and it pays to have a decent filter on. I guess I should be worried about getting a better body :lol:
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2009
  2. cpl punish

    cpl punish Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,450
    Thanks for sharing, good to see what theyre like in real life then some random review / press release stuff.

    Ben
     
  3. deepspring

    deepspring Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,601
    Location:
    Maitland, NSW
    Well I can't see any effect from this lense in any of the shots you took, which is what I'd expect from any form of Haze / UV / Skylight filter in those conditions.

    Have you tried it on any daytime landscape or cityscape shots?
     
  4. OP
    OP
    Hi-tek

    Hi-tek Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,317
    Lol at the bump in this thread from front page news.

    Was only a quick test at the time. I'll get around to some landscape/city shots to compare some different conditions. Main test was a sharpness issue so in indoor apps it seems fine.

    Refer here for reasons for the test: http://forums.overclockers.com.au/showthread.php?t=779575
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2009
  5. murcielago

    murcielago New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    263
    Location:
    Murdoch
    i did a similar test before.
    i tested the b+W filter that u used, hoya and some other crap filter.

    basically testing methodology was: meter in P and AF mode. switched to M and MF mode while retaining the same settings in P, AF mode. took shots with each filter, replaced the filter while camera is mounted on the tripod itself.

    conclusion of my tests was that the B+W filter didnt show much improvement. in fact, in some shots the hoyas proved to be better than the german.

    my HDD died, otherwise i would have posted the shots that i took.
     
  6. triggerpeg

    triggerpeg Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,387
    Location:
    Sydney
    Please dont flame me. But from my experience Hoyas are superior to the B+W and Heliopans.
    I did the below test a long time ago with B+W and Hoyas. I concluded to go with Hoyas.

    I exclusively use Kenko Pro1Ds / Hoya SHMCs on all my lenses now.

    Then i decided to test for IQ of the Hoyas/Kenkos

     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2009
  7. OP
    OP
    Hi-tek

    Hi-tek Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,317
    Try some shots at the softest setting (ie f1.4 for your 35mm)
     
  8. CD

    CD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    2,004
    Location:
    Newstead, Brisbane
    probably useful to test in flaring conditions eg. backlight to the side to see how well the coating is coping with it.
     
  9. triggerpeg

    triggerpeg Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,387
    Location:
    Sydney
    OP. Please feel free to remove my postings if you feel they hijack the thread too much


     
  10. michael_

    michael_ Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,511
    Location:
    sydney
    for me its a must when out in the field, a flying rock from a rally car will destroy my lens without the filter, with it on it is an extra barrier that will hopefully save it, the little if any loss of sharpness/iq (for me) is acceptable for the reasons i gave, if i didnt shoot out in the field i probably wouldnt bother, just depends on what you shoot, just make sure you get the best you can if you have expensive gear, i am happy to put a $130 UV filter on a lens that costs $2k +
     
  11. Technics

    Technics Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,276
    Location:
    Brisbane, AU
  12. amac38

    amac38 Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,476
    Location:
    Perth
  13. isaaus

    isaaus Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,650
    In my opinion a reputable brand like Hoya/Kenko/BW will certainly be better in every aspect than cheap egay brand and also there are copies of name brands floating on egay.

    For those who buy ultra cheap UV filters off egay. This test was for specific BOWER brand.



    Apologies for thread hi-jacking.
     
  14. OP
    OP
    Hi-tek

    Hi-tek Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,317
    The test above is different from what I'm testing. They're testing for how much UV is blocked out. Not sharpness. I'm not sure but UV protection was more important for film than digital because of their sensitivity to it. Light tranmission (f-stops) and flare tests are useful but still.

    And when buying a high end name, its not just the name. Anything other than the B+W's MRC range is rubbish as they tend to flare up pretty hard.

    No doubt, the Hoyas HMCs and Pro1s are cheaper and they probably do just as good a job as the Germans, if not better. But you're still paying more than that Bower pos which turn your $2000 into an image effective $20 lens.


    I don't mind hijacks, just as long as people understand the original point for the test lol
     
  15. Technics

    Technics Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,276
    Location:
    Brisbane, AU
    I'm not intending to hijack. It's just that I'm quite interested in seeing how the different brands of filters perform in a relative sense. Unfortunatly this doesn't help me decide if I should spring the extra cash on a B+W over say a Hoya (I'm yet to see any evidence of better IQ). However, It does demonstrate that it's possible to use filters without degraging IQ significantly which is helpful in the filter/no filter decision.
     
  16. sir_bazz

    sir_bazz Team Papparazi

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    9,330
    Location:
    Mentone, Vic.
    All it demontrates is that you won't take a big IQ hit when taking photos of paper subjects under controlled lighting.

    bazz.
     
  17. triggerpeg

    triggerpeg Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,387
    Location:
    Sydney
  18. OP
    OP
    Hi-tek

    Hi-tek Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,317
  19. SgtCaboose

    SgtCaboose Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,796
    Location:
    The Capital
  20. isaaus

    isaaus Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,650
    This is a prime example of $130 vs $2000 argument. Lens might have received one or two scratches vs loosing the front element completely.
     

Share This Page