Tiffen vs. Schneider filters? at DVinfo.net

Peter Richardson · May 24th, 2006, 10:30 PM

About to invest in some 4x4 filters for my HVX (UV Haze and Polarizer) and wanted to know if anyone preferred one of these brands over the other. So far I'm leaning towards the Schneider for the polarizer as they claim it is much stronger than any other pola on the market. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Peter

Tom Hardwick · May 25th, 2006, 12:55 AM

Me - I'd go for the best multi-coated ones. You'd walk away from any camcorder that came with an uncoated front element, so don't be tempted to save on filters.

tom.

Graham Bernard · May 25th, 2006, 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

Me - I'd go for the best multi-coated ones. You'd walk away from any camcorder that came with an uncoated front element, so don't be tempted to save on filters.

tom.

I think I understand . . but could you explain that a bit further . .the value of multi coated?

Grazie

Tom Hardwick · May 25th, 2006, 03:42 AM

Because modern zooms have so many elements in the line-up (the VX2000 has 15) the individual elements have to be coated, otherwise the light would give up at about half way. Think of searching round the house and finding 15 pieces of glass, stacking them up and looking through the whole lot at once. What you saw would be a grey, blurry mess, right?

Remember that the best coating has to be applied to the front element of the lens, because that's where the light strikes first, and that's the least protected element (most are well shielded inside a deep black cylinder). So if you intend replacing your front element with another one (a filter, a converter lens, whatever) make sure that it too has the finest multi-coating you can buy.

And hood up. Remember a lens hood is the cheapest, lightest accessory you can buy, and oz for oz gives you the greatest pictorial retuurns. Shadow that front element and you're qiuds in.

tom.

Jim Michael · May 25th, 2006, 06:03 AM

Light tends to reflect at the interface of media with different refractive indices. A lens coating is applied to provide an additional interface with a thickness of a half wavelength to counteract the reflection. "White" light is composed of multiple wavelenths of light. By combining coatings of varying thicknesses the reflections that occur can be handled by the appropriate coating thickness at the various wavelengths.

Light loss is additive, so multicoating is highly desirable in lenses with many elements as the total loss for single vs. multi coated lenses is higher. As for a filter, as this is a single element in the chain (unless using multiple filters), I would place optical flatness at a higher priority than number of coatings as long as there is at least a single coating, and would want to see lab tests comparing the optical quality of each brand of filter.

Matt Irwin · May 25th, 2006, 11:37 AM

Peter, to answer you initial question, I'd go with Schneider. It is a matter of preference, but I think Schneiders are just better filters. I went with an 82mm B+W UV and some 4x4 Schneiders (POLA, N3, N9) for a basic kit with my HVX.

Peter Richardson · May 25th, 2006, 11:42 AM

Thanks Matt and everyone, very helpful advice. I will order some Schneiders then. Best,

Peter

Ken Beals · May 26th, 2006, 12:20 PM

Matt ~

Since lens hoods and filters are new territory on my journey to improving could you do a wee bit of decoding of the Schneider filters you mentioned:

What is a B+W UV ?

also what are the key reasons you use the 4x4 POLA, N3 , N9 and the B+W UV ?

thanks

Brian Wells · June 2nd, 2006, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Richardson

About to invest in some 4x4 filters for my HVX (UV Haze and Polarizer) and wanted to know if anyone preferred one of these brands over the other.

Both are made from the same optical-quality glass by Schott. Both are also the same thickness (4mm). The main difference between brands is that Tiffen filters are constructed using a thin layer of gelatin material sandwiched in between two layers of optical glass and sealed together with some kind of glue. The layers can sometimes break apart and render the filter useless.

Another anamoly in the Tiffen line is the "Clear" filter which is not made out of optical glass, but instead "Soda Lime" glass, which is the same stuff used for car windows. It has a green tint -- in other words, not "Clear" at all.

All Schneider filters are constructed from solid optical glass (i.e. - Schott glass) with the filter material melted in the glass itself and hence are built for life. The edges of the filters are rounded off and smoother to the touch. They are simply better designed filters. I have many of them and am completely satisfied. Can't say that about other brands I have tried. Buy right, cry once.

Peter Richardson · June 2nd, 2006, 01:50 AM

Hey Brian--Thanks for the incredibly informative and helpful post--makes the decision between the two brands pretty clear (no pun intended), and fortunately I've not yet bought the Tiffen (though I did purchase the Schneider) so looks like it will be two Schneiders. Thanks again,

Peter

May 24th, 2006, 10:30 PM	#1
Peter Richardson Major Player Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 608	Tiffen vs. Schneider filters? About to invest in some 4x4 filters for my HVX (UV Haze and Polarizer) and wanted to know if anyone preferred one of these brands over the other. So far I'm leaning towards the Schneider for the polarizer as they claim it is much stronger than any other pola on the market. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Peter

May 25th, 2006, 11:37 AM	#6
Matt Irwin Major Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 327	Peter, to answer you initial question, I'd go with Schneider. It is a matter of preference, but I think Schneiders are just better filters. I went with an 82mm B+W UV and some 4x4 Schneiders (POLA, N3, N9) for a basic kit with my HVX. __________________ Matt Irwin DP / matt.irwincine.com

May 26th, 2006, 12:20 PM	#8
Ken Beals Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Tempe, Az Posts: 172	Matt ~ Since lens hoods and filters are new territory on my journey to improving could you do a wee bit of decoding of the Schneider filters you mentioned: What is a B+W UV ? also what are the key reasons you use the 4x4 POLA, N3 , N9 and the B+W UV ? thanks __________________ Mediocrity is a disease...

May 25th, 2006, 12:55 AM	#2
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Me - I'd go for the best multi-coated ones. You'd walk away from any camcorder that came with an uncoated front element, so don't be tempted to save on filters. tom.

May 25th, 2006, 03:42 AM	#4
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Because modern zooms have so many elements in the line-up (the VX2000 has 15) the individual elements have to be coated, otherwise the light would give up at about half way. Think of searching round the house and finding 15 pieces of glass, stacking them up and looking through the whole lot at once. What you saw would be a grey, blurry mess, right? Remember that the best coating has to be applied to the front element of the lens, because that's where the light strikes first, and that's the least protected element (most are well shielded inside a deep black cylinder). So if you intend replacing your front element with another one (a filter, a converter lens, whatever) make sure that it too has the finest multi-coating you can buy. And hood up. Remember a lens hood is the cheapest, lightest accessory you can buy, and oz for oz gives you the greatest pictorial retuurns. Shadow that front element and you're qiuds in. tom.

May 25th, 2006, 06:03 AM	#5
Jim Michael Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 895	Light tends to reflect at the interface of media with different refractive indices. A lens coating is applied to provide an additional interface with a thickness of a half wavelength to counteract the reflection. "White" light is composed of multiple wavelenths of light. By combining coatings of varying thicknesses the reflections that occur can be handled by the appropriate coating thickness at the various wavelengths. Light loss is additive, so multicoating is highly desirable in lenses with many elements as the total loss for single vs. multi coated lenses is higher. As for a filter, as this is a single element in the chain (unless using multiple filters), I would place optical flatness at a higher priority than number of coatings as long as there is at least a single coating, and would want to see lab tests comparing the optical quality of each brand of filter.

May 25th, 2006, 11:42 AM	#7
Peter Richardson Major Player Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 608	Thanks Matt and everyone, very helpful advice. I will order some Schneiders then. Best, Peter

June 2nd, 2006, 01:50 AM	#10
Peter Richardson Major Player Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 608	Hey Brian--Thanks for the incredibly informative and helpful post--makes the decision between the two brands pretty clear (no pun intended), and fortunately I've not yet bought the Tiffen (though I did purchase the Schneider) so looks like it will be two Schneiders. Thanks again, Peter