Does anyone have this filter and the B+W 77mm Clear UV Haze with Multi-Resistant Coating? Do you prefer one over the other?
1419170
I don't use clear filters because they can have a distorting. I use my polarizer and ND filters but that's it.
1419171
Hi Lisa, they are both amazing filters. The Kaesemann is especially useful as both a neutral density and reflection reduction/cloud enhancer. As a neutral density filter it will allow you to use a wide aperture for background and foreground out of focus effect. The Kaesemann filter has a layer that is resistant to degradation even with wide temperature swings. You just need to take several pictures, rotating the filter until you get the best effect. Once you have that effect, the clarity of images with clouds can be even further enhanced with post processing like LightRoom. I recommend this filter. Hi Lisa, they are both amazing filters. The Kaesemann is especially useful as both a neutral density and reflection reduction/cloud enhancer. As a neutral density filter it will allow you to use a wide aperture for background and foreground out of focus effect. The Kaesemann filter has a layer that is resistant to degradation even with wide temperature swings. You just need to take several pictures, rotating the filter until you get the best effect. Once you have that effect, the clarity of images with clouds can be even further enhanced with post processing like LightRoom. I recommend this... » Read More Hi Lisa, they are both amazing filters. The Kaesemann is especially useful as both a neutral density and reflection reduction/cloud enhancer. As a neutral density filter it will allow you to use a wide aperture for background and foreground out of focus effect. The Kaesemann filter has a layer that is resistant to degradation even with wide temperature swings. You just need to take several pictures, rotating the filter until you get the best effect. Once you have that effect, the clarity of images with clouds can be even further enhanced with post processing like LightRoom. I recommend this filter. « Show Less
1419172
So... these filters serve two different purposes. The UV filter that I purchased is on my lens to protect the first element when I'm in situations that require me to be less than 100% diligent about where my lens is. A hood serves the same purpose so I supposed it is kinda redundant redundant... The Circular Polarizer is designed to reduce glare coming off of non-metallic surfaces. It can add "pop" to landscapes and cloud scapes much in the same way that polarized sunglasses do for your eyes. They do reduce the amount of light that makes it to your sensor and you'll need to take this into consideration. Hope that helps. So... these filters serve two different purposes. The UV filter that I purchased is on my lens to protect the first element when I'm in situations that require me to be less than 100% diligent about where my lens is. A hood serves the same purpose so I supposed it is kinda redundant redundant... The Circular Polarizer is designed to reduce glare coming off of non-metallic surfaces. It can add "pop" to landscapes and cloud scapes much in the same way that polarized sunglasses do for your eyes. They do reduce the amount of light that makes it to your sensor and you'll need to take... » Read More So... these filters serve two different purposes. The UV filter that I purchased is on my lens to protect the first element when I'm in situations that require me to be less than 100% diligent about where my lens is. A hood serves the same purpose so I supposed it is kinda redundant redundant... The Circular Polarizer is designed to reduce glare coming off of non-metallic surfaces. It can add "pop" to landscapes and cloud scapes much in the same way that polarized sunglasses do for your eyes. They do reduce the amount of light that makes it to your sensor and you'll need to take this into consideration. Hope that helps. « Show Less
1419173
So... these filters serve two different purposes. The UV filter that I purchased is on my lens to protect the first element when I'm in situations that require me to be less than 100% diligent about where my lens is. A hood serves the same purpose so I supposed it is kinda redundant redundant... The Circular Polarizer is designed to reduce glare coming off of non-metallic surfaces. It can add "pop" to landscapes and cloud scapes much in the same way that polarized sunglasses do for your eyes. They do reduce the amount of light that makes it to your sensor and you'll need to take this into consideration. Hope that helps.
1963577
I believe you would be using the 46mm filter for the 20mm pancake:B+W 46mm Clear UV Haze with Multi-Resistant Coating (010M)
1963576
I believe you would be using the 46mm filter for the 20mm pancake: http://www.amazon.com/46mm-Clear-Haze-Multi-Resistant-Coating/dp/B0000BZL1P/ref=pd_bxgy_p_img_y
1979807
No filters are 'required' per se; however, I strongly recommend purchasing an inexpensive 67mm UV filter to protect the front element from scratches or damage. Multi-coated filters will reduce glare and reflections on the lens and glass filters are more scratch resistant and typically better optically than plastic. After destroying a more expensive Hoya, I am currently using the AGFA 67mm Digital Multi Coated Ultra Violet (UV) Filter (Protector) APUVF67Within 2 weeks of purchasing my lens, I pulled it out of the bag and my filter was shattered. I don't recall any dropping the bag or any significant impact but I was glad the damage was to a $40 filter rather than a $600 lens. No filters are 'required' per se; however, I strongly recommend purchasing an inexpensive 67mm UV filter to protect the front element from scratches or damage. Multi-coated filters will reduce glare and reflections on the lens and glass filters are more scratch resistant and typically better optically than plastic. After destroying a more expensive Hoya, I am currently using the AGFA 67mm Digital Multi Coated Ultra Violet (UV) Filter (Protector) APUVF67Within 2 weeks of purchasing my lens, I pulled it out of the bag and my filter was shattered. I don't recall any dropping the... » Read More No filters are 'required' per se; however, I strongly recommend purchasing an inexpensive 67mm UV filter to protect the front element from scratches or damage. Multi-coated filters will reduce glare and reflections on the lens and glass filters are more scratch resistant and typically better optically than plastic. After destroying a more expensive Hoya, I am currently using the AGFA 67mm Digital Multi Coated Ultra Violet (UV) Filter (Protector) APUVF67Within 2 weeks of purchasing my lens, I pulled it out of the bag and my filter was shattered. I don't recall any dropping the bag or any significant impact but I was glad the damage was to a $40 filter rather than a $600 lens. « Show Less
1382944
I think as long as the thread is 77mn it should work, I use it with a cannon 24-105 and it has become my favorite filter, but I cannot assure you it will work the same with your lens, I have a bunch of lee filters but none of them has the same strength in stopping light as the B&W;, the camera reading of how to set the shutter speed is always wrong but I have learnt that I have to shoot at a much longer exposure than what the camera is telling me, keep that in mind if you decide to try it. I absolutely love it! BTW what negative effect do you get with the polarizer?
311506
Alex, I actually shoot with it a lot outdoors as it cuts any glare and deepens contrast. Great filter!
301742
The best value in a protection filter is the Hoya 58mm DMC PRO1 Clear Protector Digital Filter. I can't believe that price. I recently purchased a used Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 it came with a Sunpack UV filter, which destroyed the image quality of the lens. I took a couple pictures with no filter, to make sure I was going to keep the lens, then promptly ordered a Hoya Pro1 Clear filter for it. The larger 67mm filter for the Tamron, is 3 times what the 58mm is selling for, but, well worth it. There is NO degradation in image quality using the Hoya Pro1 Clear filter. The best value in a protection filter is the Hoya 58mm DMC PRO1 Clear Protector Digital Filter. I can't believe that price. I recently purchased a used Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 it came with a Sunpack UV filter, which destroyed the image quality of the lens. I took a couple pictures with no filter, to make sure I was going to keep the lens, then promptly ordered a Hoya Pro1 Clear filter for it. The larger 67mm filter for the Tamron, is 3 times what the 58mm is selling for, but, well worth it. There is NO degradation in image quality using... » Read More The best value in a protection filter is the Hoya 58mm DMC PRO1 Clear Protector Digital Filter. I can't believe that price. I recently purchased a used Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 it came with a Sunpack UV filter, which destroyed the image quality of the lens. I took a couple pictures with no filter, to make sure I was going to keep the lens, then promptly ordered a Hoya Pro1 Clear filter for it. The larger 67mm filter for the Tamron, is 3 times what the 58mm is selling for, but, well worth it. There is NO degradation in image quality using the Hoya Pro1 Clear filter. « Show Less
120699
I would wager based on my experience with the B&W standard lens filters that you would see some vignetting on both of these filters, even with the 010M I have to be aware of a slight darkening of the edges of my photo if I back off to 17mm ( I currently shoot a 17-40mm lens) The polarizer will definitely vignette. To avoid this issue I'd go with the "Slim" model filters B&W produces for wide angle lenses.
1106482
Yes. I was confused by the picture of the filter too. The AC5000 unit (black, silver control area, blue UV light tower unit) used to use 2 filters "pushed together" on top of each other, but now it seems to be a single filter and more expensive too! Yikes!Hope this helps.
1798707
The info given on this filter lens are as follows. the fully coated surfaces increase light transmission and absorb almost all range of uv rays to give clearer and sharper picture with less haze. so i will say yes
1029096
I only use one lens for this camera, the 20 mm F1.7 prime lens, for which I do not use filters. I've never used UV filters and have not missed them.
1979806
Many people use a UV filter to protect the lens, but on DPReview, it appears that the filter does little to protect the lens. So, two things: a.) Buy a lens hood; according to the anecdotes of many users on DP Review, it protects far better than a filter, and adds contrast to the image. b.) I would still buy a UV or clear filter to keep grit and dust off of the lens--who wants to disturb the multi-coatings on the lens? And the filter will provide some protection. Digital cameras do not need the UV portion of the filter. I use the BW filters, because they don't attract much dust and are easier to clean. Again, filters at least keep grit from getting on the lens (and therefore, you won't scratch a lens trying to get the grit off).
52671
No. I only have the 50mm ND 8 filter. Is this a question for users or for Amazon about the availability of a 77mm filter?
909945
Interesting that you asked this question as I am pondering this myself though with the haze filter. Different schools of thought from using as "protection of camera lens" to cutting glare to those who don't use them at all. This filter is on at all times during the day unless shooting in very low light. My haze filter not so sure about.
1026381
If you are taking snapshots with a DSLR then almost any UV filter can protect the lens. I prefer to spend minimal time in post production and typically purchase B&W; because they seem to have the best coatings and glass. Some less expensive filters will produce strange distortions and colors in photographs.
120623
I this week found a 46mm UV filter in Chicago for my S700. Perfect, and only 15$!
875663
Hi Keith, I do not use filters on my lenses. I do use the lens hoods. After 33 years as a professional photographer I find the filters a bit of a pain.