Good Brands for Filters, I have a L100-400 77mm and a Tamron 18-270 72mm and i want to get filters

[Alucard13]

I have read about people having issues putting filters on the Canon L100-400 that you lose your sharpness and others say they do not have a problem with it. The one thing people seem to agree on is to get a good brand of filter and B&H filters are brought up, but I went to their site and looked for B7H branded filters in 72mm and 77mm and I did not see any.  I am looking for a polarizing and a neutral density filter for both lenes but mainly for the L.  I am going to Alaska next year they should help with bluer skies and toning down the brightness.  So, anyone have favorite Brands or specific filters they recommend.  This should not mater but in case it does I have a T7i Camera and currently only the Tamron has a UV filter on it by HOYA, the L100-400 does not. 

Thank you.

 

[rs-eos · Accepted solution]

B&H would most likely be B&H Photo (authorized Canon reseller that sells numerous photography equipment).   I've not heard of B&H filters.

I personally use B+W filters.  Currently their XS-Pro line.  Their newest line is quite expensive, but worth it, IMO.   I especially like their CP (Circular Polarizer) filter in the XS-Pro or better lines as they have high transmission.  Other brands would have a bit more light loss and potentially a higher amount of difference between the "weakest" and "strongest" filter amounts.   Though this may not be a huge issue.

The XS-Pro line also is low profile, so you can use two of them together with minimal to no vingnetting.  I've only done this when I needed both an ND (neutral density) filter to use wider apertures outdoors, but also wanted a CP filter at the same time.

I also like B+W because they use brass.  Whereas most filter threads on Canon lenses are either plastic or aluminum.  Due to being made up of a different material, this helps the filter not bind too much to the filter threads so will be easier to remove.  Still need to be careful though as you can overtighten anything.   If using cheaper aluminum filters on lenses with aluminum threads, that can indeed be much easier to bind.

I would not purchase UV filters.  They don't do anything.   If you want extra protection for your front elements on lenses, get a good quality clear filter.

Finally, I haven't used them, but Lee and Hoya are two other brands I saw highly recommended while I initially researched my own filter purchases.

[Anonymous]

I use B+W clear filters for protection of the lens. They also make ND and circular polarizing filters. You can't go wrong with B+W filters.

[rs-eos · Accepted solution]

B&H would most likely be B&H Photo (authorized Canon reseller that sells numerous photography equipment).   I've not heard of B&H filters.

I personally use B+W filters.  Currently their XS-Pro line.  Their newest line is quite expensive, but worth it, IMO.   I especially like their CP (Circular Polarizer) filter in the XS-Pro or better lines as they have high transmission.  Other brands would have a bit more light loss and potentially a higher amount of difference between the "weakest" and "strongest" filter amounts.   Though this may not be a huge issue.

The XS-Pro line also is low profile, so you can use two of them together with minimal to no vingnetting.  I've only done this when I needed both an ND (neutral density) filter to use wider apertures outdoors, but also wanted a CP filter at the same time.

I also like B+W because they use brass.  Whereas most filter threads on Canon lenses are either plastic or aluminum.  Due to being made up of a different material, this helps the filter not bind too much to the filter threads so will be easier to remove.  Still need to be careful though as you can overtighten anything.   If using cheaper aluminum filters on lenses with aluminum threads, that can indeed be much easier to bind.

I would not purchase UV filters.  They don't do anything.   If you want extra protection for your front elements on lenses, get a good quality clear filter.

Finally, I haven't used them, but Lee and Hoya are two other brands I saw highly recommended while I initially researched my own filter purchases.

[Alucard13]

Ricky, thank you for the Indepth answer, I'll look at the B+W Filters, I like your replies as I have seen them before because you add information that is helpful to making a decision above the original question.

Alan

[Waddizzle · Accepted solution]

The only filters I use are B+W.

If you have the Canon EF 100-400mm L II USM, then I do not recommend any filters, except for a B+W Nano Clear.  This lens and filters do not agree with one another on any level.  I assume it is because of the coatings on the internal lens elements.  Filters cause soft images with this lens.

As far as the Tamron lens goes, I’m not sure if you need filter besides a clear one, to protect the front element from getting dirty.  The Tamron 18-270 falls into the category of super zoom, which is not the highest quality lens.  The best lenses have zoom ratios of 4:1 or less, which the Tamron exceeds by a LOT.

UV FILTERS:  Because every digital image sensor assembly includes a UV filter layer, UV filters have become obsolete relics from the film era.  You will not notice any difference if you try an A/B test, with and without a UV filter.  If anything, using the external UV filter may create softer images.

CPL FILTERS:  This type of filter polarizes the light, which means it removes random phase information.  Remove phase information an Phase Detect AF systems do not agree with one another.  The only time I might use one is on a tripod shooting landscapes.  I will focus without the filter, switch the lens to MF, install the CPL filter and then take the shot.  The goal is not to use AF with the CPL filter installed.

ND FILTERS:  If you use an ND filter, then you will want to purchase the best one you can find to avoid Chromatic Aberration distortion.  The variable ND filters are especially prone to this type of image distortion.  Unless you are shooting video, or shooting with a a VERY wide aperture lens on a bright sunny day, then I see no need for an ND filter.

To summarize, most of the uses that you would use a filter when shooting with film and developing images in a dark room can be easily recreated in post processing.  A high quality ND filter can cost more than a [year or two] worth of subscription fees from Adobe for Photoshop and Lightroom. 

[Alucard13]

Thank you that is a lot of good information also and that goes with what I have read about the 100-499 and filters. 

[Walt_Felix]

I personally like the H&Y K-Series Magnetic Filter Holder with the drop-in CPL.  I have a handful of their 100x100mm and 100x150mm Magnetic ND filters for the front.   As stated above, UV filters are pretty much obsolete despite them often being bundled with lenses by some retailers.  Other than offering a little bit of front glass protection, they are not really worth the money in my opinion.  
I use the CPL a lot as my images are mostly automotive photography.  Mostly just using the CPL to take the glare off the windshield and not worried about reflections in the body/paint on the sides.  I feel the shots look better when you can see some of the interior through the front glass.  
I use ND filters for stuff like waterfalls, ocean waves and sunsets. Anywhere where you want to drag out the exposure time.   And even sometimes with some of my late night light painting. A dark, magnetic, ND filter can be used as a pseudo lens cap for times when you want to block light.  For example, this is an entirely in camera, single, 203 second exposure where I had the camera mounted on a gimbal so I could rotate on the barrel axis of the lens.  I rotated the body 1/16th, removed the ND filter for two seconds, replace it and rotated another 1/16th. Repeating the process until I was all the way around.