# B+W XS-Pro HTC 'High Transmission' Käsemann circular polarizing filters



## lastcoyote (May 13, 2015)

Just wondering if anyone has any experience or opinions on these new/latest HTC High Transmission C-POL's from B+W?

Do they perform as well as the previous 'AUC' XS-Pro from B+W? I use an 82mm one of those on my 24-70 f2.8L II and am considering getting the latest 'HTC' XS-Pro C-POL in 77mm for my 70-200 f2.8L IS II.

Can't find much talk or reviews about these latest generation B+W premium line filters.


----------



## lastcoyote (May 14, 2015)

I guess not then ;D
Oh well I'm sure these latest generation HTC filters are great being top of the range from B+W.


----------



## M_S (May 14, 2015)

I have the 82mm one and use that on both lenses with a step up ring on the 77mm thread of the 70-200. Very good quality, no problems so far. The slim version has sometimes a tendency to stick to the step up ring or the UV-Filters I have additionally attached on both lenses for weather sealing, as the POL-filter is very thin.


----------



## lastcoyote (May 14, 2015)

M_S said:


> I have the 82mm one and use that on both lenses with a step up ring on the 77mm thread of the 70-200. Very good quality, no problems so far. The slim version has sometimes a tendency to stick to the step up ring or the UV-Filters I have additionally attached on both lenses for weather sealing, as the POL-filter is very thin.



Thanks for replying.

Yeah I've got a heliopan brass step up ring to use my 82mm on my 70-200 at the moment but of course that means unable to fit the lens hood. 

Think I'm just going to order the new B+W HTC XS-Pro version C-POL in 77mm and be done with it.


----------



## johnnycash (May 17, 2015)

Hi,
I use nothing but Käsemanns and I'm very happy with them. I feel like your top quality lenses deserve the best filters which B+W can offer.
I was even contemplating buying Zeiss filters for my Otus but B+W was better in direct comparison - namely better coating.


----------



## candyman (May 17, 2015)

I do have a B+W CPOL HTC filter - 67mm - to use with my 35mm/f2 IS lens. Unfortunately I did not have time to use it but may start with it coming weeks. I will do a comparison with my regular 77mm CPOL B+W filter
According to Schneider Optics the use of the HTC-version should limit the loss of light only 1 to 1,5 stop. A regular CPOL filter will result in a loss of 3 to 4 stops of light.
I trust Schneider optics for this statement. 
If ok, I will replace my 77 CPOL with the HTC version.


----------



## lastcoyote (May 18, 2015)

candyman said:


> I do have a B+W CPOL HTC filter - 67mm - to use with my 35mm/f2 IS lens. Unfortunately I did not have time to use it but may start with it coming weeks. I will do a comparison with my regular 77mm CPOL B+W filter
> According to Schneider Optics the use of the HTC-version should limit the loss of light only 1 to 1,5 stop. A regular CPOL filter will result in a loss of 3 to 4 stops of light.
> I trust Schneider optics for this statement.
> If ok, I will replace my 77 CPOL with the HTC version.



Thanks candyman.
I've got one ordered now so shall get to test out myself too. 
I guess the improved loss of light has no affect on the polarizing ability.


----------



## Ozarker (May 19, 2015)

lastcoyote said:


> Just wondering if anyone has any experience or opinions on these new/latest HTC High Transmission C-POL's from B+W?
> 
> Do they perform as well as the previous 'AUC' XS-Pro from B+W? I use an 82mm one of those on my 24-70 f2.8L II and am considering getting the latest 'HTC' XS-Pro C-POL in 77mm for my 70-200 f2.8L IS II.
> 
> Can't find much talk or reviews about these latest generation B+W premium line filters.



I have that exact polarizer and use it on the exact same lens you want to use it on. Here's a photo I took with it in the middle of the day at the local golf course pond. The glare was tremendous without the filter and the winter sun low in the southern sky. I was pointing very near 180 degrees to the sun. Works great for me. I have no idea how it compares to the other filter you mention.


----------



## NancyP (May 19, 2015)

I would expect the polarization effect of the "high transmission" CPLs to be reduced vis-a-vis the standard CPLs, on the "no free lunch in physics" principle. By how much? Unknown. The "high transmission" and standard CPLs from SinghRay behaved this way, supposedly.


----------



## mackguyver (May 19, 2015)

NancyP said:


> I would expect the polarization effect of the "high transmission" CPLs to be reduced vis-a-vis the standard CPLs, on the "no free lunch in physics" principle. By how much? Unknown. The "high transmission" and standard CPLs from SinghRay behaved this way, supposedly.


I have a high transmission CPL from Hoya and it seems pretty much equivalent to my standard B+W Kaesemann CPL. The high transmission films have been developed for the latest LCD TVs and screens to reduce power consumption from what I understand, but I don't think the polarization is any less than a standard one.


----------



## fish_shooter (May 19, 2015)

NancyP said:


> I would expect the polarization effect of the "high transmission" CPLs to be reduced vis-a-vis the standard CPLs, on the "no free lunch in physics" principle. By how much? Unknown. The "high transmission" and standard CPLs from SinghRay behaved this way, supposedly.



I tried using some high transmission polarizing sunglasses since light levels fall off here in Alaska during the latter part of the year. They were all but useless for improving looking through the surface for salmon so I gave up on them.


----------



## [email protected] (May 20, 2015)

I use the Marumi Exus line of polarizers, as by my own measurements, they led to a loss of only 1 and a third stops of light. They work very well, don't reduce IQ any more than any other filters I've tried (and a bit better than the high-end Hoyas), and cost several times less than B+W. I did not, however, test them against anything else in terms of the strength of the polarization effect. 

My sense on polarizers and filters in general is that it is very difficult to get factual information on their performance. Aside from the wonderful Lenstip article from years ago (http://www.lenstip.com/115.4-article-Polarizing_filters_test_Results_and_summary.html) the only information out there seems to be personal assertions that tend to be disconnected from brand comparisons and an increasingly confusing set of marketing acronyms introduced by the vendors. The article, which used direct observation and data analysis, found that B+W made some of the best filters and one of the worst, and that the highest seven filters in price on average significantly underperformed the next cheapest seven.

I do not think it's safe to make assumptions about a filter's performance by carrying the B+W name and the B+W price. It's probably a peach of a filter, but it's highly likely that there are cheaper ones that are as good or better. We just don't have the means to know.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 20, 2015)

I was in a similar position about a month ago - but in reverse! I had a 77mm Cpl that I was quite happy with but needed an 82mm one for my new Canon 24-70 F2.8 V2.
I did a lot of reading around and the Käsemann ones were highly recommended from a number of sources. I was also seeing high praise for the Formatt Hitech Firecrest CPL filters:
https://www.formatt-hitech.com/en/products/Firecrest-Circ.-Polariser~192.html
As they are not far from me I searched them out and ended up buying one. I haven't had many opportunities to use it so far (out playing with the big lens much!) but I am very pleased with it! The trouble is that I am no longer happy with my 77mm CPL!


----------



## Valvebounce (May 21, 2015)

Hi John. 
Please don't tease us like this, which brand of CPL is it you are no longer happy with, and what is it that displeases you, build, colour cast, lack of polarising effect? 

Cheers, Graham. 



johnf3f said:


> The trouble is that I am no longer happy with my 77mm CPL!


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 22, 2015)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi John.
> Please don't tease us like this, which brand of CPL is it you are no longer happy with, and what is it that displeases you, build, colour cast, lack of polarising effect?
> 
> Cheers, Graham.
> ...



Actually it is 2 brands, Hoya and Kood. Note these were bought some time ago (before I knew better) and were their cheapest versions so I am not really criticising them - you just get what you pay for! I am sure their current high end models are much better than mine but they didn't exist then, or at least I couldn't find them!


----------



## Eagle Eye (May 22, 2015)

I strongly suspect it's the same XS-Pro filter with new marketing. My regular Kaesemann polarizer says it blocks "approximately 1.3 stops" of light. My XS-Pro polarizer says the same. The marketing materials for the "new" HT polarizers says 1-1.5 stops. That sounds an awful lot like "approximately 1.3" to me. And no, they don't lose any of their polarizing capabilities; B+W Kaesemann are the best in the business.


----------



## Valvebounce (May 22, 2015)

Hi John. 
Thanks for clearing that up. Seems reasonable. 

Cheers, Graham. 



johnf3f said:


> Valvebounce said:
> 
> 
> > Hi John.
> ...


----------



## candyman (May 22, 2015)

Eagle Eye said:


> I strongly suspect it's the same XS-Pro filter with new marketing. My regular Kaesemann polarizer says it blocks "approximately 1.3 stops" of light. My XS-Pro polarizer says the same. The marketing materials for the "new" HT polarizers says 1-1.5 stops. That sounds an awful lot like "approximately 1.3" to me. And no, they don't lose any of their polarizing capabilities; B+W Kaesemann are the best in the business.




Eagle Eye, you may be right.
I checked again Schneider optics Brochure and some of the websites (Dutch) that offer the HTC filter. They offer that filter next to _B+W Käsemann Circulair Pol MRC Nano XS-Pro Digital._ I assume that is the previous version (without the HTC in the productname) that is still in stock and they still sell. Both come at the same price.


----------



## Eagle Eye (May 22, 2015)

candyman said:


> Eagle Eye said:
> 
> 
> > I strongly suspect it's the same XS-Pro filter with new marketing. My regular Kaesemann polarizer says it blocks "approximately 1.3 stops" of light. My XS-Pro polarizer says the same. The marketing materials for the "new" HT polarizers says 1-1.5 stops. That sounds an awful lot like "approximately 1.3" to me. And no, they don't lose any of their polarizing capabilities; B+W Kaesemann are the best in the business.
> ...



For the 67mm, B&H has the regular XS-Pro version discontinued and replaced by the HT version.


----------



## lastcoyote (May 22, 2015)

Eagle Eye said:


> I strongly suspect it's the same XS-Pro filter with new marketing. My regular Kaesemann polarizer says it blocks "approximately 1.3 stops" of light. My XS-Pro polarizer says the same. The marketing materials for the "new" HT polarizers says 1-1.5 stops. That sounds an awful lot like "approximately 1.3" to me. And no, they don't lose any of their polarizing capabilities; B+W Kaesemann are the best in the business.



I've just received my new 77mm B+W XS-Pro HTC Käsemann filter now. It's definitely not just new marketing. When I hold it up next to my 82mm XS-Pro Käsemann its easy to see its not quite as dark tinted. 
I've done a brief test and it's just as effective which is great. Usual super smooth turning of outer ring. The structure of it is identical, low profile with front threads still. Just using new high transmission foils. 

Got it at great price too straight from Germany. Good exchange rate for me on euro at the moment.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 22, 2015)

Just being nosy but would you mind letting me know where you got it? I am interested to see how the price compares to the Formatt Firecrest.
Thanks.


----------



## lastcoyote (May 22, 2015)

johnf3f said:


> Just being nosy but would you mind letting me know where you got it? I am interested to see how the price compares to the Formatt Firecrest.
> Thanks.



I got it from a seller direct on amazon.de
Thing is it was from a seller called GEOPHOTO who no longer have it listed. There was only 2 in stock when I ordered mine. It was €123.88 plus €7.90 delivery which converted to a total of £99.59. Arrived to UK in 4 days. Pretty good price!


----------



## Eagle Eye (May 22, 2015)

lastcoyote said:


> Eagle Eye said:
> 
> 
> > I strongly suspect it's the same XS-Pro filter with new marketing. My regular Kaesemann polarizer says it blocks "approximately 1.3 stops" of light. My XS-Pro polarizer says the same. The marketing materials for the "new" HT polarizers says 1-1.5 stops. That sounds an awful lot like "approximately 1.3" to me. And no, they don't lose any of their polarizing capabilities; B+W Kaesemann are the best in the business.
> ...



Given that the data lists the regular XS-Pro as reducing light 1.3 stops and the HT version reducing 1-1.5 stops, I'd be curious to know your real world experience.


----------



## lastcoyote (May 23, 2015)

The latest B+W literature just says this regarding the new HTC filters:

"The new generation of Käsemann High Transmission (HTC) polarizing filters is fitted with a new polarizing foil which has higher translucency (transmission), yet still provides outstanding effectiveness. The filter extension factor is only 2 to 3, equivalent to approx. 1 to 1.5 f-stops."

Im not going to get much of a chance until July really to properly test out the filter and compare with my previous generation Käsemann.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 23, 2015)

Thanks Lastcoyote, I will keep an eye out.


----------



## andrewflo (May 24, 2015)

lastcoyote said:


> Eagle Eye said:
> 
> 
> > I strongly suspect it's the same XS-Pro filter with new marketing. My regular Kaesemann polarizer says it blocks "approximately 1.3 stops" of light. My XS-Pro polarizer says the same. The marketing materials for the "new" HT polarizers says 1-1.5 stops. That sounds an awful lot like "approximately 1.3" to me. And no, they don't lose any of their polarizing capabilities; B+W Kaesemann are the best in the business.
> ...



Glad to see there's a discussion on this going. I was just pondering the same thing about what the deal is with these new HTC CPLs from B+W the other night.

lastcoyote any chance you could do a quick test of exposures from various degrees of polarization? Curious to know if there truly is a noticeable difference that could be worth the extra ~$30 cost.

Thanks!!


----------



## lastcoyote (May 24, 2015)

andrewflo said:


> lastcoyote said:
> 
> 
> > Eagle Eye said:
> ...



I'd love to be able to do some tests for you andrewflo but I'm currently out of action for some time as I'm having a bad flare up (IBD). So rather unwell....again! :-\ Hoping to be well for my trip to South of France in July.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 24, 2015)

Thanks for the info lastcoyote.
Your "Flare up" sounds nasty, hope it clears up soon!


----------

