What filter/filters for 28-70 f/2.8?

[fmw]

Fred - it's nice to hear from someone who's done the testing himself.

Which brands did you compare and which filters?

Thanks

It has been a long time and I can't find the write up at the moment. We tested filters for 35mm, medium format and large format. The 35mm filters were a mix of Nikon, B+W, Leica, Tiffen, Hoya and Adorama house brand. We tested UV filters mainly because they are plain optical glass with nothing added.

The panel did the photography. We asked each panel member to take the same camera and lens and filters and shoot whatever he wanted, suggesting some shots into light sources as well as front lit subjects. We shot everything on KM25 and had the camera tripod mounted. When we finished, we all got together and had the group view transparencies with my Schneider 8X loupe. We also projected the transparencies on my Carousel projector for a second round. The panel members didn't know who made the images or which filter was used for which image. The person who shot each roll would identify the filters in each frame for me and I would put number codes on them that nobody but me knew.

The panel then tried to identify the filters and match them with the slides. They couldn't do it. Not even close.

The reason I did this test is that I had been reading some things that talked about the same things that dsp mentioned above and I wondered if it were true. Since I do a lot of lens testing and I'm pretty familiar with how optical glass works on cameras, I put this concept to the test just to find out. The panel members were astonished. None of them expected this result. I wasn't that surprised about it.

I used this same panel (colleagues of mine) to do some other tests. It was a chance to get together in the studio and share some pizza and beer and, perhaps, shoot an attractive model. It was always interesting to see what happens when you take preferences and prejudices out of the picture. Do you think the panel could tell studio shots made with a Hasselblad vs. a Mamiya RZ 67 with a 6X6 back? Not even close. Pure random guessing. Could they tell a Tamron macro lens from a Micro Nikkor? Nope. Some of us changed our buying habits over those get togethers.

 

[loves_guitar]

Hey Fred, thanks for all of your insightful input!
Now when you talk about filters, are you talking about ALL filters, or just UV filters? Like are you saying, aside from the mounting rings, there are no optical differences between a low-cost filter and the most expensive filter?
I'm just starting to amass my photographic gear, and this would be great to know before I go out and spend a lot of money.

 

[fmw]

Hey Fred, thanks for all of your insightful input!
Now when you talk about filters, are you talking about ALL filters, or just UV filters? Like are you saying, aside from the mounting rings, there are no optical differences between a low-cost filter and the most expensive filter?
I'm just starting to amass my photographic gear, and this would be great to know before I go out and spend a lot of money.

We tested mostly UV filters, as I said, because they are just plain optical glass so they are all comparable. We were trying to distinguish filter quality. Colored filters can differ from brand to brand, not in terms of the glass itself, but in the actual color value. In other words all 81A filters aren't identical in terms of "pinkness." Dark yellow can be darker or lighter depending on the brand.

Personally, I like the B+W filters because they have (or at least had) brass mounting rings. But you can buy a Tiffen or some other brand and get the same optical product with aluminum rings, pay less and have the same effect or lack of effect on your images.

If you shoot digital, there isn't much need for filters - at least colored filters. You can do what most filters do in Photoshop after the fact. I recommend UV filters for protecting front lens elements and use them myself. I don't recommend stacking filters because I have managed to produce flare doing that. If you want to filter polarized light, then you will need a polarizer because that isn't something you can do with photoshop. That should do it. Good shooting.

 

[Christie Photo]

I always suspected this sort of results since filters mount so very close to the lens. Presuming all is clean, I wouldn't expect any affect. My reasoning is that since the filter cannot come into focus, what changes is the light entering the lens... no optical change.

Pete

 

[Christie Photo]

And... I use NO filters when making portraits. I used to use a diffuser and vignette when I shot film.

The only filter I use now is a polarizer when shooting buildings and landscapes. The warming filters are gathering dust along with the film holders.

I have NO UV filters... never had. I just take care of my lenses.

 

[loves_guitar]

We tested mostly UV filters, as I said, because they are just plain optical glass so they are all comparable. We were trying to distinguish filter quality. Colored filters can differ from brand to brand, not in terms of the glass itself, but in the actual color value. In other words all 81A filters aren't identical in terms of "pinkness." Dark yellow can be darker or lighter depending on the brand.

Personally, I like the B+W filters because they have (or at least had) brass mounting rings. But you can buy a Tiffen or some other brand and get the same optical product with aluminum rings, pay less and have the same effect or lack of effect on your images.

If you shoot digital, there isn't much need for filters - at least colored filters. You can do what most filters do in Photoshop after the fact. I recommend UV filters for protecting front lens elements and use them myself. I don't recommend stacking filters because I have managed to produce flare doing that. If you want to filter polarized light, then you will need a polarizer because that isn't something you can do with photoshop. That should do it. Good shooting.

I'm looking at getting a circular polarizer filter, and I just wondered if there was a huge quality difference from the cheap to expensive types.
I was just curious if you tested polarizer filters as well in your experiments.

Thanks, Fred!

 

[fmw]

I'm looking at getting a circular polarizer filter, and I just wondered if there was a huge quality difference from the cheap to expensive types.
I was just curious if you tested polarizer filters as well in your experiments.

Thanks, Fred!

Not on that test. But I made another test once to determine any differences between linear and circular polarizers. To make a long story short, the linear ones did a more effective job of filtering polarized light than the circular ones.

Many modern cameras need circular ones to allow full metering automation but they don't work quite as well as the old linear ones. I still use linear polarizers to this day because of that test. I never tested effectiveness, brand against brand so I can't tell you if one works better than another. I did this test around 1997 so the polarizers might be different these days. I don't know.