1st impression, Heliopan vs B&W

[enboe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While I await the public release of the Leica IR cut filter and firmware, I ran a quick, moderately uncontrolled test of the 2 types of IR cut filters acquired to date, Heliopan (from Tamarkin) and B&W (from Ebay). 2 observations:

 

1) The interference coating on the Heliopan is much denser. As a test, view the reflection off of an incandescent bulb in both filters and you will see a much deeper pink in the Heliopan.

 

2) Perhaps as a result of 1), the Heliopan does a much better job at filtering IR, especially from specular reflections. The test shots I made of the castle at Disneyland show reflections off of the 24k gold spires blowing out as highlights with the B&W, and staying within dynamic range with the Heliopan.

 

3) Overall color of the Heliopan seems more accurate, the B&W more "brassy".

 

4) Exposure on the Heliopan seems underexposed, B&W overexposed, when Auto is selected.

 

Control data: M8, v1.092 firmware, 28/2.8/asph @ f/8, partly-cloudy weather, Auto shutter speed, auto white balance, Adobe color space, DNG capture, processed in Capture One Pro, then CS2 for resizing.

 

Future work: Awaiting Leica filter, v1.10 firmware, Tiffen hot mirror (a brainstorm), more-controlled setup.

 

Hope this is useful to the general user community.

 

Eric

 

Attachments:

1) B&W full-frame

2) B&W crop

3) Heliopan full-frame

4) Heliopan crop

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[sisoje]

...I am not sure how you can compare these two sample images? Even the framing looks 100%, the lightning condition is totally different from one the the other...

[enboe]

Agreed that there are some differences.

 

I waited for clouds to pass for similar shadow characteristics. This was not a perfect match, hence my comment on somewhat uncontrolled conditions. That being said, the auto exposure would compensate for the 0.5 stop or so difference in available light. I specifically did not adjust the exposure in post-processing to allow for as fair of a comparison as possible.

 

I will be reshooting, hopefully on a fully sunny day, once I am able to purchase the Leica filter.

 

Enjoy.

 

Eric

[msadat]

you got to clean your sensor, you got dust

[enboe]

Yup - I have dust, and haven't figured out a dust-free cleaning process yet! At least you get to see the original image with the absolute minimum post processing.

 

I looked up the shutter speeds on the 2 pictures. The B&W was at 1/360, the Heliopan at 1/250.

[carstenw]

I think that we might learn more about this from an indoor, tungsten-lit shot of different black items, like clothing, suitcases, and a Macbeth colour chart...

[hammam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have shown these differences between Heliopan and B+W a few weeks ago, in firmware 1.09. These are two very simple jpegs on Auto, 160 ISO, firmware 1.092. No manipulation except resizing. First shot is Heliopan, second is B+W. Speak by themselves.

 

Now, Leica are recommending their filters «exclusively» (their words) - which are B+W under the Leica name - and provides two of them as complimentary, when in fact the Heliopan are more effective. And cost 50% less. Food for thoughts.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[finkaudio]

Hi,

 

as far as I can read from other posts, the LEICA filters are not B+W. Some people got them already and found it out. Should we not stop to say that they are B+W? It might be a fashion to bash on LEICA, but they never said it is B+W.....

 

Best regards

 

Karl-Heinz

[hammam]

Hi,

 

as far as I can read from other posts, the LEICA filters are not B+W. Some people got them already and found it out. Should we not stop to say that they are B+W? It might be a fashion to bash on LEICA, but they never said it is B+W.....

 

Best regards

 

Karl-Heinz

 

Of course, they never said their filters are B+W. Why would they say that? And actually, you're right, they are not. I should have been more precise. According to some reports, the Leica IR-cut filters are made by Schneider Optics, the same people who make the B+W brand. And, AFAIK, they are made to the same specifications. This is also my dealer's opinion. So, they may not bear the name B+W but, more than likely, they are the same.

 

As for «bashing Leica» being a «fashion», this is not the case here. The M8, wonderful camera as it may be, is causing more than its share of problems to its owners. We love it, but it's a product that's keeping us on our toes since its release last November. Don't you find it normal that we be on the look-out for potential problems and possible solutions, and share these with our fellow M8 shooters? If the Leica filters sell for 50% more than the B+W - though being the same filters - and then if both brands prove to be less effective than the less (much less, in the case of the Leicas) Heliopan filters, don't you think a lot of M8 users will be happy to know it, and save litterally hundreds of dollars on their filters for a better result? Let's juts remain watchful.

 

Leica is not some sacred name to worship. Leica is a business, looking to make profits. And justly so. This is not Leica bashing, this is consumer awareness

[sean_reid]

Hi,

 

as far as I can read from other posts, the LEICA filters are not B+W. Some people got them already and found it out. Should we not stop to say that they are B+W? It might be a fashion to bash on LEICA, but they never said it is B+W.....

 

Best regards

 

Karl-Heinz

 

According to my conversations with Leica, the filters they are providing (though they may be made in Japan) are built to the specifications of the B+W/Schneider 486 filters. Leica sent me early examples of the '"official" filters and they were marked Schneider 486 MRC.

 

The Heliopan Digital filter is effective but it has a slightly different effect on color than a 486 and it shows different patterns of cyan drift. I did controlled comparison tests in natural and tungsten lighting.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I can confirm Seans statement . They are built to the same specs as the B+W IR /UV 486.

[finkaudio]

Guy,

 

if you talk to LEICA, they will tell you that they are not the same.

 

What I understood from discussions is that on everything above 35mm, it makes no big difference if you use LEICA or B+W, but on WA, it does. What I understood is that they changed something compared to the B&W. And in order to correct the cyan in the right way, the filter has to produce the cyan according to the correction. .

 

If I read the post from Olav, I get the impression LEICA sells something for a high price that is as "bad" as a normal B+W a and they have been stupid enough not to find the much better Heliopan for half the money.

 

I just don't have a tendency to believe other people cannot think, read the Internet or know the business.

 

Best regards

 

 

KH

[guywalder]

Leica are happy to re-badge panasonic cameras and charge more for them, so there is no lack of precedent.

As for the filters, well Leica have started shipping, so we will know soon enough!

Guy

[hammam]

Guy,

 

if you talk to LEICA, they will tell you that they are not the same.

 

What I understood from discussions is that on everything above 35mm, it makes no big difference if you use LEICA or B+W, but on WA, it does. What I understood is that they changed something compared to the B&W. And in order to correct the cyan in the right way, the filter has to produce the cyan according to the correction. .

 

If I read the post from Olav, I get the impression LEICA sells something for a high price that is as "bad" as a normal B+W a and they have been stupid enough not to find the much better Heliopan for half the money.

 

I just don't have a tendency to believe other people cannot think, read the Internet or know the business.

 

Best regards

 

 

KH

 

Karl-Heinz (BTW, it's Olivier, not Olav, but that's okay ) of course Leica will tell you they are not the same as B+W. They are trying to sell them to you at a higher price - two complimentary filters notwithstanding - so why would they admit they are the same? Your are not that naive, are you? Just imagine the discussion: «Er.. yes, they are the same as B+W, but we'd rather you buy our brand.» «Why would I buy a 50% more expensive filter if the cheaper one has the same specs?» «Because there's the Leica name engraved on it.»

 

As for «other people cannot think, read the Internet or know the business.» maybe Sean's or Guy's post or others' will tell you that this not the case

 

But, right, let's wait and see how the complimentary Leica filters work.

 

BTW, anybody knows of a grip for the M8 that's does not cost an arm like Leica's? I mean, 200$ CAN for this unwieldy and ugly thingy is a bit too much.

[hankg]

I have both Heliopan and B+W and the color differences are negligable. The only concern between the 2 would be the difference in Cyan shift with wide angle lenses. The Heliopan seems a bit more aggresive in cutting IR (Olivier's example also bears this out) so it won't be an ideal match for Leica's firmware fix which is calibrated to the B+W filters. On any lens from 50 (or maybe even 35) and longer I would be happy with the Heliopan. As a matter of fact, I have always prefered Heliopan filters, I think they are #1 quality wise in filters.