The topic of 'best CPL filter' recently came up. Personally, I prefer B+W filters for most applications (or their parent company, Schneider-Kreuznach, in some cases such as when they had an 82mm 10-stop ND unavailable in the B+W line).
In addition to CPLs and NDs, I use B+W filters to protect the front element of most of my lenses (not the M22/2, M15-45 or 600/4 II). I recently noticed that that B+W has changed their mount designations/lineup – it was actually 2-3 years ago, but I just noticed recently because although I’ve bought several new RF lenses over the past three years, I’ve had clear filters to transfer from other lenses, with the exception of the 95mm clear filter I bought for the RF 28-70/2, a B+W XS-Pro before the mounts changed.
Three years ago they introduced the T-Pro mount. T could be for either thin or titanium, but the latter just a finish color applied over the usual brass. They’re very slightly thinner and thus lighter than the XS-Pro mounts, but still have front threads (important for putting a lens cap on the filter). Two years ago they introduced the Basic and Master mounts. Those replace and are roughly equivalent to the F-Pro and XS-Pro, respectively. Both add knurling to the outside edge, which is useful.
The previous mounts and thicknesses were:
The current mount thicknesses are:
Note that for the new mounts, the thicknesses vary based on the thickness of the glass. The values above are for 0.75 mm thick filters, used in diameters ranging from 43-82 mm. The 86 mm and 95 mm use 1 mm thick filters and have correspondingly thicker mounts in all types. The 112 mm filter has a 1.5 mm thick piece of glass and the Master mount is 6.1 mm thick (that diameter is only available in Master). Also, they do plan on releasing a T-Pro CPL, but 'coming soon' is wearing a little thin since the line is now 3 years old.
The coatings are unchanged in recent years, although B+W no longer sells uncoated or single-coated filters like they used to for many styles (though the IR and Soft filters don't have the multi-resistant coating, MRC). The options are MRC for the Basic and MRC Nano for the T-Pro and Master, they have the same transmission properties but the Nano coating offers more scratch resistance and easier cleaning.
So which one is best? B+W suggests that T-Pro is better for wide angle lenses and for pretty much every type of camera from DSLR/MILC to bridge and compact cameras. IMO, that's solely because those filters are also the most expensive and likely the most profitable for them (same glass as the Master line, less brass, and the 'T' means titanium colored, not that there's titanium used in the construction). Lens designs over the past couple of decades are very tolerant of filters, often with no increase in optical vignetting until two or even three filters are stacked. Thus, the 0.5 mm shorter T-Pro makes no difference optically even for wide angle lenses. Yes, they're lighter (less brass), but a 77mm XS-Pro/Master filter weighs only 37 g so 'lighter' is a dubious benefit (FWIW, the 112mm Master is the heaviest single filter in the current lineup and it weighs 90 g). They do offer a 5 year warranty on the T-Pro filters, again of dubious benefit since the regular filters are plenty durable.
Personally, I went with the Master mount for the two filters I just bought, 52mm for the RF 24/1.8 and 112mm for the 100-300/2.8 I have on preorder. As above, I don't see that the T-Pro offers any meaningful benefit. The T-Pro filters cost ~35% more than the Master ($63 vs. $47 for 52mm clear, $136 vs. $104 for 82mm clear). Is the titanium color an advantage? B+W says, "The titanium-colored finish gives the T-Pro filters a unique appearance." Reminds me of something Canon said about the el-cheapo 75-300mm III, "The front part of the zoom ring now sports a silver ring for a luxury touch." Pass.
They also changed their packaging recently, in association with their 75th anniversary. In the 'good old days', B+W filters came in a plastic case (enclosed in a thin cardboard box, which has changed over time), with a hard foam insert sized for the filter if it was smaller than the box itself. Going forward, they are in the process of switching over to a leather case for all filters (enclosed in a thicker cardboard box). They mention a gradual rollout for that, to which I can attest. The Master 52mm clear filter I bought came in the same thick cardboard box as the Master 112mm Clear, but the former was in a cloth bag while the latter was in the leather pouch.
Here are the old (plastic case, one with insert, 2 box designs with the older one on the left), intermediate (Master 52mm with cloth bag) and new (Master 112mm with leather pouch) packages:
In the box on the left is an extra 82mm XS-Pro clear filter just waiting for some future RF lens to protect.
I wonder if people will prefer the leather case to the plastic one. For the clear (and UV) filters, IMO the case doesn't really matter because the filter goes on the lens and stays there. For CPL/ND filters that I carry with me, I still don't use the plastic cases. Instead, I use nylon single-filter pouches that enable me to take just one or several filters and tuck them in various places in the camera bag. They changed from B+W branding to Schneider-Kreuznach branding some time back, but they are still available at Adorama (in black now, not blue). To me, the padded nylon pouches feel more protective than the new leather one (although those come pre-labeled with an insert in the window on the back).
Hope this info is useful to anyone who hasn't bought a B+W filter recently.
In addition to CPLs and NDs, I use B+W filters to protect the front element of most of my lenses (not the M22/2, M15-45 or 600/4 II). I recently noticed that that B+W has changed their mount designations/lineup – it was actually 2-3 years ago, but I just noticed recently because although I’ve bought several new RF lenses over the past three years, I’ve had clear filters to transfer from other lenses, with the exception of the 95mm clear filter I bought for the RF 28-70/2, a B+W XS-Pro before the mounts changed.
Three years ago they introduced the T-Pro mount. T could be for either thin or titanium, but the latter just a finish color applied over the usual brass. They’re very slightly thinner and thus lighter than the XS-Pro mounts, but still have front threads (important for putting a lens cap on the filter). Two years ago they introduced the Basic and Master mounts. Those replace and are roughly equivalent to the F-Pro and XS-Pro, respectively. Both add knurling to the outside edge, which is useful.
The previous mounts and thicknesses were:
Slim mount - 3 mm (lack front threads, were dropped in favor of the XS-Pro that has them)
XS-Pro mount - 3.4 mm
F-Pro mount - 5 mm
Slim CPL - 5 mm
Standard CPL - 7 mm
The current mount thicknesses are:
T-Pro mount - 2.9 mm
Master mount - 3.4 mm
Basic mount - 4.4 mm
Master CPL - 5.2 mm
Basic CPL - 8.2 mm
Note that for the new mounts, the thicknesses vary based on the thickness of the glass. The values above are for 0.75 mm thick filters, used in diameters ranging from 43-82 mm. The 86 mm and 95 mm use 1 mm thick filters and have correspondingly thicker mounts in all types. The 112 mm filter has a 1.5 mm thick piece of glass and the Master mount is 6.1 mm thick (that diameter is only available in Master). Also, they do plan on releasing a T-Pro CPL, but 'coming soon' is wearing a little thin since the line is now 3 years old.
The coatings are unchanged in recent years, although B+W no longer sells uncoated or single-coated filters like they used to for many styles (though the IR and Soft filters don't have the multi-resistant coating, MRC). The options are MRC for the Basic and MRC Nano for the T-Pro and Master, they have the same transmission properties but the Nano coating offers more scratch resistance and easier cleaning.
So which one is best? B+W suggests that T-Pro is better for wide angle lenses and for pretty much every type of camera from DSLR/MILC to bridge and compact cameras. IMO, that's solely because those filters are also the most expensive and likely the most profitable for them (same glass as the Master line, less brass, and the 'T' means titanium colored, not that there's titanium used in the construction). Lens designs over the past couple of decades are very tolerant of filters, often with no increase in optical vignetting until two or even three filters are stacked. Thus, the 0.5 mm shorter T-Pro makes no difference optically even for wide angle lenses. Yes, they're lighter (less brass), but a 77mm XS-Pro/Master filter weighs only 37 g so 'lighter' is a dubious benefit (FWIW, the 112mm Master is the heaviest single filter in the current lineup and it weighs 90 g). They do offer a 5 year warranty on the T-Pro filters, again of dubious benefit since the regular filters are plenty durable.
Personally, I went with the Master mount for the two filters I just bought, 52mm for the RF 24/1.8 and 112mm for the 100-300/2.8 I have on preorder. As above, I don't see that the T-Pro offers any meaningful benefit. The T-Pro filters cost ~35% more than the Master ($63 vs. $47 for 52mm clear, $136 vs. $104 for 82mm clear). Is the titanium color an advantage? B+W says, "The titanium-colored finish gives the T-Pro filters a unique appearance." Reminds me of something Canon said about the el-cheapo 75-300mm III, "The front part of the zoom ring now sports a silver ring for a luxury touch." Pass.
They also changed their packaging recently, in association with their 75th anniversary. In the 'good old days', B+W filters came in a plastic case (enclosed in a thin cardboard box, which has changed over time), with a hard foam insert sized for the filter if it was smaller than the box itself. Going forward, they are in the process of switching over to a leather case for all filters (enclosed in a thicker cardboard box). They mention a gradual rollout for that, to which I can attest. The Master 52mm clear filter I bought came in the same thick cardboard box as the Master 112mm Clear, but the former was in a cloth bag while the latter was in the leather pouch.
Here are the old (plastic case, one with insert, 2 box designs with the older one on the left), intermediate (Master 52mm with cloth bag) and new (Master 112mm with leather pouch) packages:
In the box on the left is an extra 82mm XS-Pro clear filter just waiting for some future RF lens to protect.
I wonder if people will prefer the leather case to the plastic one. For the clear (and UV) filters, IMO the case doesn't really matter because the filter goes on the lens and stays there. For CPL/ND filters that I carry with me, I still don't use the plastic cases. Instead, I use nylon single-filter pouches that enable me to take just one or several filters and tuck them in various places in the camera bag. They changed from B+W branding to Schneider-Kreuznach branding some time back, but they are still available at Adorama (in black now, not blue). To me, the padded nylon pouches feel more protective than the new leather one (although those come pre-labeled with an insert in the window on the back).
Hope this info is useful to anyone who hasn't bought a B+W filter recently.
