Hoya filters

How good are they?

And how good are they compared to a much pricier B&W filter?

If it help's I went from B+W MRC filter to Hoya HD. They are very good and cleans off very easily from those pesky nutella laden finger prints.

I have a Hoya HMC UV on my 18-200, a B+W UV-Haze on my 70-200 and a Hoya Skylight B on the nifty.

I also have a B+W waiting for a new copy of the 24-70...

I have never seen any detrimental effects from the use of any of them, i.e. they are all good.

I chose to switch to B+W, based on their claim of using harder glass (which hopefully is more scratch resistant, I don't buy them for impact resistance. For the occasional impact, I hope the hood will be in the way.

Before the 'you don't need a filter' crowd shows up, I'll tell you that I shot with a FD 50 f1.4 from 1973 to 1987 with that tank of a camera, the Canon FTb (which I still own and still works). This lens was stolen in 1987 with its third UV filter screwed on. Had you seen the scratches the previous two had before they got discarded, you'd think again about protective filters.

MakisM1 wrote in post #15959532
I have a Hoya HMC UV on my 18-200, a B+W UV-Haze on my 70-200 and a Hoya Skylight B on the nifty.

I also have a B+W waiting for a new copy of the 24-70...

I have never seen any detrimental effects from the use of any of them, i.e. they are all good.

I chose to switch to B+W, based on their claim of using harder glass (which hopefully is more scratch resistant, I don't buy them for impact resistance. For the occasional impact, I hope the hood will be in the way.

Before the 'you don't need a filter' crowd shows up, I'll tell you that I shot with a FD 50 f1.4 from 1973 to 1987 with that tank of a camera, the Canon FTb (which I still own and still works). This lens was stolen in 1987 with its third UV filter screwed on. Had you seen the scratches the previous two had before they got discarded, you'd think again about protective filters.

Jap, thats why im thinking to start using filters. I want just to protect my glass, but as im on the way ill maybe think about a polarize filter in near future.

I use entirely Hoya and Marumi multicoated filters. they have all been fine.

MakisM1 wrote in post #15959532
Had you seen the scratches the previous two had before they got discarded, you'd think again about protective filters.

Yes, I keep my camera wrapped in tissue paper. Had you seen the damage to the tissue paper after just a few weeks you'd think again about protective tissue paper.

Just the other day I was walking past a bush when a twig rubbed against my camera. The tissue paper was ripped to shreds. I dread to think what would have happened to my camera body if it hadn't been protected by the tissue paper.

I'm so glad I listened to the salesman in the shop who told my I really needed to protect my investment with this tissue paper. It was only £20 per sheet - and it must be good because it's got 'Pro' and 'Digital' in the name.

I've never compared them to B+W, I only own a Hoya CPL. I do however like my B+W, never seen any detrimental impact on IQ, and I've tested.

hollis_f wrote in post #15962443
Yes, I keep my camera wrapped in tissue paper. Had you seen the damage to the tissue paper after just a few weeks you'd think again about protective tissue paper.

Just the other day I was walking past a bush when a twig rubbed against my camera. The tissue paper was ripped to shreds. I dread to think what would have happened to my camera body if it hadn't been protected by the tissue paper.

I'm so glad I listened to the salesman in the shop who told my I really needed to protect my investment with this tissue paper. It was only £20 per sheet - and it must be good because it's got 'Pro' and 'Digital' in the name.

Lol greetings from a guy named sarcasm :P

However, most of the products which have to to in photography, deliver good quality in high price. Allmost all lenses etc. You get what you pay for; however not everytime...

hollis_f wrote in post #15962443
Yes, I keep my camera wrapped in tissue paper. Had you seen the damage to the tissue paper after just a few weeks you'd think again about protective tissue paper.

Just the other day I was walking past a bush when a twig rubbed against my camera. The tissue paper was ripped to shreds. I dread to think what would have happened to my camera body if it hadn't been protected by the tissue paper.

I'm so glad I listened to the salesman in the shop who told my I really needed to protect my investment with this tissue paper. It was only £20 per sheet - and it must be good because it's got 'Pro' and 'Digital' in the name.

Frank, you should be using Charmin. It's so squeezably soft, it's irresistible!...

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=0yG-y8poTLU

LOL!!

I bought a nice Hoya UV for my 50/1.2L . . . the filter still works, but it only lasted about 4 weeks before the glass became loose when I was cleaning it. Now, if I clean in a circular motion, the glass spins with the lens pen. Sigh.

If you want to use filters then the Hoya HMC or HD will perform just as well as most of the more expensive makes just ensure that you buy them from a reputable source because all the well known filters are available as fakes. Certainly don't buy them from an online auction site.

Ramon-uk wrote in post #15963613
If you want to use filters then the Hoya HMC or HD will perform just as well as most of the more expensive makes just ensure that you buy them from a reputable source because all the well known filters are available as fakes. Certainly don't buy them from an online auction site.

Really they even fake filters? This world nowadays :P

I use the cheapest hoya uv filters, they let 97% of light thru. The one that let 99% light thru cost at least twice as much. I can live with the 2% degradation in performance.

kenwood33 wrote in post #15965067
I use the cheapest hoya uv filters, they let 97% of light thru. The one that let 99% light thru cost at least twice as much. I can live with the 2% degradation in performance.

You're looking at the numbers the wrong way round. Flare isn't caused by transmitted light, it's caused by reflected light. If a filter lets through 97% then it reflects 3%, or three times as much as the filter that transmits 99%. So you're not looking at 2% worse performance, you're looking at 300%.