cheap filters vs. expensive filters

[david_header]

bare with me here, i'm sure this has been covered extensively before.

 

B&H General Brand circular polarized filter 67mm- $39.00

Pentax circular polarized filter 67mm-$109.95

 

Are the Pentax filters or any other name brand filters that much

better than the General Brand filters? Or is it just the name you're

buying?

 

Also I have another dumb question....does it make any difference in

the order your filters are attached. For example would it make a

difference if you put the UV filter on after your polarizer or vice

versa. I would think the polarizer would work better if it didn't

have to deal with any UV light.

 

Be nice :-)

DH

[cjtower]

With a handful of notable exceptions, the name on the filter is not the name of the company making the glass, nor the ring, nor assemblying the unit (exceptions of old are Wratten-Kodak, of new B+W -- and for the most part Hoya/Tiffin)! As a general rule, German filters are the best, followed closely by Japan, followed not-so-closely by other Asian companies. In many cases, a good bit of the cost difference accounts for the "set" (brass ring with spanner lock-downs vs. pressed plastic). Many cheap filters have suprisingly good glass (get advice from someone who actually tested the filters with film: I tested old Spiralite and Vivitars against old and new Tiffin and Hoya, and they hold their own -- though of course old filters are not modern multi-coated; new Sigma filters are also quite good, for the money -- this being the ket phrase, "for the money"; current Sunpaks / Kenkos are o.k., but the rings kind of iffy). One thing to consider when getting many knockoff filters is that there can be problems getting filters apart, or off a camera if "bumped" even slightly; plastic filter threads are easily damaged. It would be hard to answer your question, definitively unless someone knew who made the filters for B&H. Is the glass in the Pentax 3x as good as in the B&H? I doubt it, but there are other factors to consider. Buying a used B+W, Tiffin or Hoya is also an option. For most all photographic applications, you wont go wrong with a Tiffin/Hoya filter.

[al_kaplan1]

Most UV light is absorbed passing through glass. There's not much point in UV filters other than lens protection in my opinion. If you put on the polarizer take off the UV! The polarizer will also absorb some of the UV.

[geris_k]

David, you're right, doezens of members have already invested time and effort in addressing this issue. Go to the search bar and type "cheap filters". Look around, you'll find a lot of info already captured on this topic.

[david_header]

Thanx guys for your time and professional input. I greatly appreciate it. Whenever I ask questions like this at a camera store I can always tell they're trying to push one of their products on me instead of giving me truthful advice. I've learned more on this website than anywhere else. thank you photo.net!!!

 

cheers

DH

[k_michael]

Recently, I went to Adorama to purchase a filter. The salesman asked me what brand and I responded "Tiffen". He asked me why I was interested in garbage when Hoya was so much better. He claimed that Tiffen's glass was not optical quality glass. Well, I sent an email to Tiffen and explained all of this to them. Not only did I recieve an email but also a phone call from the president of the company. He was exceptionally nice to me and he ever rip the salesman at Adorama apart for claiming that Tiffen glass was not optical quality. I myself have used Tiffen from day one and can't complain.

[gareth_harper]

I use cheapo Hama filters when I can get them. I bought a 77mm polarizer for 18 quid, the Hoya would have cost me 60 quid. The Hama seems to be a quality product and I can't tell the difference. Unfortunately I couldn't get hold of B&W Hamas and had to buy two 77mm Hoya's at 40 quid each. Ouch!