Is Rodenstock UV MC filter quality about the same as Heliopan?

Happy Hopping

Happy Hopping

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2004
Messages
7,836
on the rodenstock web site, they said their reflection reduction is less than 2%.

http://www.rodenstock-photo.com/de/produkte/​filter-digital (external link)

and I'm happy w/ Rodenstock, I've been using them for 8 yr.

at the Heliopan website,

http://www.heliopan.de​/produkte/ (external link)

I can't find its reflection reduction, but according to BH Photo, it's less than 2%. But I need to see that declaration on Heliopan website to be sure.

Then there is the issue of price. They are both made in Germany, but it looks like Rodenstock price is half vs. Heliopan, but that can't be right, can it?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?N=10232474&InitialSearch=yes&sts=pi

Heliopan at $160

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/875436-REG/Rodenstock_507711_77mm_UV_Blocking_Digital.html

Rodenstock at $86

I have 2 canon L lens that needs to protect
 
Last edited:
I personally don't buy anything other than B+W (for screw on filters)... and it's generally the most expensive.
The long and the short is this: If you can't 100% guarantee that the optics you're putting in front of your lens will not degrade quality, than don't bother. If you have a $1k lens and you put a cheap $25 filter that degrades its quality, what was the point of spending the $1k in the first place? If you aren't certain, it's too good to be true, it's from an untested brand: I would personally say don't bother. You spend all this money to get the best glass, don't cheap out on the filter in front of it.

Some might say it's voodoo, but I don't trust anyone outside of Lee Filters, B+W and their subsidiaries (which includes Schneider Optics).
 
B+W is German. I typically don't use UV filters at all unless I'm shooting where there might be blowing debris or sand or salt water spray. I pretty much only use ND filters and CPL's when I need them, all B+W.
 
If you're serious about effect filters I personally wouldn't even bother with the intermediary cost of using screw on filters.

Basically I use B+W specifically for UV Haze MRC filters (which is basically just a fancy way of saying a filter to protect my lens glass). For any type of effect (including GND, etc), I would generally recommend buying a Lee Filter holder and buying square/rectangular filters. It costs a little bit more as an investment, but I personally find that solution much more elegant rather than either A) buying multiple effect filters for different thread sizes or B) buying step down adapters for a[n] 77/82mm screw on filter.

Granted the Lee Filter adapter uses Adapter rings, but like I say, I think it's a more elegant solution. It also makes GND filters adjustable which is really important if you do a lot of landscape work.

It costs a little bit more upfront, but I think the investment is worth it.
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to find their reflection reduction amt. on their website.

On not totally unrelated matter, about 8 yr. ago, I read a web page that compares Hoya filter vs. Rodenstock, the page has the circular filter as a diagram, and shows Hoya is 2.5% distortion and Rodenstock is 1%.

I spent hours yesterday using the search engine for this page. I just can't find it. Is there anyone by chance to come across this page?
 
I didn't bother replying to this thread earlier because even with your response, I don't think it requires one, but here is my attempt anyway.

I don't think that looking through a bunch of spec sheets is going to give you an accurate representation of using a product. You know that's true for computer parts (if just looking at "specs", motherboards from every manufacturer look the same), you know it's true from lenses (Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina all use specs to sell product), and so does, well, every other industry. A spec sheet won't tell you purity of materials, quality of materials, manufacturing techniques, level of quality control, or any other long list of criteria that is the difference between a good or bad product. In short: spec sheets by the manufacturers are designed to be deceptive.

Therefore, I refer you to my previous post in which I wouldn't trust any of these manufacturers as far as I can throw them. If you want to, that's fine. I suppose in the worst case scenario you're out a few bucks and your picture quality suffers, so it's not life and death. Especially if photography is just a hobby and you're not putting the quality of your work for any clientele on the line. That said, I don't think anyone on this forum is really going to be able to comment on obscure third party products from relatively unknown manufacturers more than a cursory Google search will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top