Choosing from the 4 different B+W filter

[braveheart0707]

Hello,

B+W 82mm XS-Pro Clear MRC-Nano 007 Filter

B+W 82mm UV Haze MRC 010M Filter

B+W 82mm XS-Pro UV Haze MRC-Nano 010M Filter

B+W 82mm Clear MRC 007M Filter

what are the main differences between them?

 

[SoCalWill]

They're all significantly more expensive than post-processing.

 

[Bobthearch]

Hello,

B+W 82mm XS-Pro Clear MRC-Nano 007 Filter

B+W 82mm UV Haze MRC 010M Filter

B+W 82mm XS-Pro UV Haze MRC-Nano 010M Filter

B+W 82mm Clear MRC 007M Filter

what are the main differences between them?

The UV filters block UV light from reaching the sensor. Film is sensitive to UV rays; digital cameras are not.

Haze filters add a slight color tint in an attempt to 'cut' through the haze. It seems like a touch of the Detail slider in post processing works just as well but without the discoloring.

Clear filters are exactly that, perfectly clear.

MRC and MRC-Nano are two different grades of lens coatings. You can read the B+W website for more on that.

One thing they all have in common, they'll keep ocean spray off of your main lens while adding reflections, ghosting, and sunspots to the images.

 

[Bobthearch]

To summarize, you don't really need any of them for a digital camera.

But if you do, you need additional skill to avoid the ghosting and reflections and sunspots.

B+W is a better brand than most.

 

[braveheart0707]

Ya my primary purpose is protection.

Speaking of clear ones, there are two. One seems to be XS-PRO, the other is F-Pro. Both are 007M, whatever that means. What are their differences?

 

[braveheart0707]

To summarize, you don't really need any of them for a digital camera.

But if you do, you need additional skill to avoid the ghosting and reflections and sunspots.

B+W is a better brand than most.

 

[Bobthearch]

Ya my primary purpose is protection.

Speaking of clear ones, there are two. One seems to be XS-PRO, the other is F-Pro. Both are 007M, whatever that means. What are their differences?

F-Pro has a substantial brass body. The XS-Pro are a thin low-profile filter. I like the heavier build quality of B+W F-Pro filters, but someone using filters on a wide-angle lens or stacking multiple filters might prefer the thin.

007M, I don't know. The actual glass thickness perhaps?

 

[Bobthearch]

Speaking of that, what skills do you mean? I do notice reflections and flares when using these clear filters.

Don't have a light source (sun, streetlight, etc.) shining on the filter surface. I imagine bright reflections like the sun glinting off a wave could do the same thing.

Don't use them at night. Practically any light source can produce ghosting in the dark.

For the most part though, I suggest not using clear / UV / haze filters at all on a digital camera unless you're attempting some specific effect.

..............

Personal non-commercial websites with no ads or tracking:
Local photography: www.ratonphotos.com
Travel photography: www.placesandpics.com

 

[braveheart0707]

Speaking of that, what skills do you mean? I do notice reflections and flares when using these clear filters.

Don't have a light source (sun, streetlight, etc.) shining on the filter surface. I imagine bright reflections like the sun glinting off a wave could do the same thing.

Don't use them at night. Practically any light source can produce ghosting in the dark.

For the most part though, I suggest not using clear / UV / haze filters at all on a digital camera unless you're attempting some specific effect.

..............

Personal non-commercial websites with no ads or tracking:
Local photography: www.ratonphotos.com
Travel photography: www.placesandpics.com

I know that, but for $1000+ glasses, I feel insecure without them @_@ Plus, I find it alot easier to clean the filters than the front elements.

You are absolutely right. My Zeiss glass has no ghosting maybe due to the T*, but when both the B+W and Zeiss T* filters gives me ghosting when pointing at a light source.

 

[a_c_skinner]

It is a moot point if filters protect a lens or not. There are circumstances in which they seem to worsen physical damage, though they will keep the front clean. People whose living depends on their gear seem (by my observations) to often use them in situations where a lot of dirt is likely.

If the sun is behind you you'll see no perceptible degradation of the image in normal viewing of finished images, I've done the experiment. Into the sun or with other bright lights in the frame you will see flare and ghost images, again I've done the experiment.

UV isn't needed, haze filters don't work, or at least they never seemed to to me, so clear is the answer. B+W are good. I'd pay more for better coatings, but I suspect they are all the same in the B+W range.

Get the thin mount filter if you plan to use it on a wide angle lens.

This seems a good treatment: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/12/front-element-lens-protection-revisited/

--
Andrew Skinner

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

... for $1000+ glasses, I feel insecure without them

The real question, though, is surely not whether you feel insecure or if you really are insecure. In other words, what does the filter give in the way of security?

When it comes to physical impact a filter is much more delicate than the front element of your lens. Broken filter glass can cause more damage to the lens than many direct impacts. A hood gives far better impact protection than a filter and also reduces flare, while a filter induces flare.

There are a very few lenses that need a filter for weather protection (in which case their specs say so). But the real vulnerability of a lens to weather, salt and grit is around the mount and zoom and/or focus rings. The only thing a filter really gives is a false sense of security.

Plus, I find it a lot easier to clean the filters than the front elements.

Modern front elements usually have much tougher coatings than filters. You're more likely to cause abrasions to the filter, increasing their image-degrading.