Since when did Amazon start making photography filters?

Amazon makes filters now?

www.amazon.com/dp/B00XNMWU78/ref=cm_sw_e...t_dp_U_0iSlCbMZ8YEX2

$5.99 for a UV filter, cheap as ever, so wouldn't be something I would buy.  But find it surprising that they make filters now too! 

Like many house brands that many traders and retailers
created or use, products are made somewhere by some
makers no one can get no info about and sold through
through Amazon, B&H, Adorama… etc.

Nikon Shooter wrote: Like many house brands that many traders and retailers
created or use, products are made somewhere by some
makers no one can get no info about and sold through
through Amazon, B&H, Adorama… etc.

Yeah, just surprised to see filters made by Amazon.  LOL 

Peter P wrote: Yeah, just surprised to see filters made by Amazon.  LOL 

Not made but sold as house brand, Peter.

I've seen other products listed as Amazon Basics; I don't know who manufacturers them. I would imagine 'Basic' is the key word there! But I agree, rather surprising to see them having filters made; other items I'd expect.

Kind of not surprised.  

Yikes, avoid at all costs. Nothing like ruining your photos by putting a cheap piece of glass on your lens. 

Jared-Weaver wrote: Yikes, avoid at all costs. Nothing like ruining your photos by putting a cheap piece of glass on your lens. 

How expensive should a flat piece of optical glass be?

fmw wrote: How expensive should a flat piece of optical glass be?

There we go again… the keyword: optical glass. These guys are
not created equal; chemical composition, complex layered coat-
ing and the ring mount — among others — all add to the cost of 
the end product offered behind the counter.

As far as I know, there is so much room to cheat in there for good
market branders that, once more, testing is where the right balan-
ce between price and description on the package will be revealed.

This is not meant for you  fmw  but is just a confirmation and exten-
tion for the benefit of the forum members.

Nikon Shooter wrote:

fmw wrote: How expensive should a flat piece of optical glass be?

There we go again… the keyword: optical glass. These guys are
not created equal; chemical composition, complex layered coat-
ing and the ring mount — among others — all add to the cost of 
the end product offered behind the counter.

As far as I know, there is so much room to cheat in there for good
market branders that, once more, testing is where the right balan-
ce between price and description on the package will be revealed.

This is not meant for you  fmw  but is just a confirmation and exten-
tion for the benefit of the forum members.

I don't doubt that one can spend more money manufacturing one filter over another.  I'm just wondering how much it matters.  In my experience, it doesn't matter all that much.  I have no experience with the filters in the OP.  I'm just not sure they would affect images negatively compared to some other filter.  Reminds me of expensive watches that don't tell time any better than lesser ones. 

Back in the film days when we used a lot of filters, the most expensive ones I owned were made by B+W and Leitz.  I had a lot more filters made by Kenko, Hoya and other similar brands.  Did the expensive filters outperform the less expensive ones?  Not in my experience.  I can understand why the high end brands would make a photographer feel better but feeling better about filters was never important to me.

Cheap filters are known to degrade image quality, increase flaring, leak light and scratch easily. Most of them also have a strong warm or cool color cast or in the case of Cokin, magenta (good luck editing that out). So I would say that "optical glass" should be of the highest quality and therefore extremely expensive. I recently received some Breakthrough Photography magnetic filters for Christmas and they blew my B+W filters out of the water in terms of image sharpness and color neutrality. 

Why screw a layer of garbage glass over a carefully crafted professional lens? 

I asked for a definition of how expensive a filter should be but still don't have one.  Can you share the results of your tests of filters?  Is your position motivated by personal experience or by someone else's  personal opinion?  Do the Amazon branded filters quality as "garbage" to the point of destroying a photo?   How are they rated by Amazon customers?  I've read your opinion from all kinds of photographers but haven't experienced any of it in my half century of photography.  Have I been lucky?

I'll answer your question of why would one screw a garbage filter to the front of a professional lens.  The answer is to produce the desired filtration of the light.  If the filter truly is garbage then it should be thrown away.  Can you name some "garbage" brands that have been tested and deemed to be "garbage.?"

The most clear and carefully crafted filters that are as close to color neutral as possible can run anywhere between $160 and $500 depending on whether it's round or square, ND or GND, hard edge or soft edge, radial, adjustable ND, ect. They can be VERY expensive, but the advantages in my experience are noticable.

I've shot with low end Cokin square filters, mid-grade B+W filters and with my new pro grade Breakthrough filters. You won't see much difference in an internet quality image, but you will notice a huge difference during editing and printing. Here's what I found. 

Cokin- Made of resin. Noticable magenta cast that is difficult to edit out. Images we're unsharp and distorted due to the poor quality filters becoming warped over time. Lots of light leak coming through the low quality filter holder. 

B+W Pro- Don't be fooled by a pro label, these are mid-grade due to the noticable color cast of their ND filters. I used a 3 stop ND and a polarizer. The ND had a warm cast that could be easily edited out. Overall, it made image softer than shooting without the filter. The polarizer was of questionable quality for a "pro" series filter. It reduced incoming light by about 2 stops and produced overall soft images. Both filters did have coatings that reduced flare and made cleaning easier which was a nice upgrade from my easily scratched Cokins. 

Breakthrough Photography- 25 year warranty, nuff said. I have the magnetic series and I can't praise these enough. Tack sharp, almost totally color neutral with a VERY minor warm cast, multiple coatings that eliminate a significant amount of flare, zero light leak and best of all magnetic. This is especially useful for folks like me who love long exposure photography. Using the screw on round ND filters was risky in the field because there was always the risk that I'd drop my filter, knock my camera over or get the filter stuck on the lens. Now it's easy on, easy off which is nice when your light is quickly disappearing and you're needing to recalculate your base exposure constantly. I also have a night sky filter that helps remove the effects of light pollution and a polarizer which I tested recently. Everything performed admirably and was well worth the cost. 

Even if you don't print, high end filters make shooting more enjoyable since you're not having to wrestle with editing out the negative effects of light leak and extreme color cast in the digital darkroom. I'm the type that likes to get as much work in the field as possible, that means having the best gear avlaible to me, something I'd recommend everyone do. Photography is a VERY expensive hobby, don't skimp on the extras. You can't expect to produce technically superior images when you cut corners. 

Thanks for answering.

Well be seeing Amazon gas stations soon.  LOL