Gear Talk > Lenses

Canon 16-35mm L IS USM - Need ND Filters, recommendations ? Question

(1/4) > >>

revup67:
I recently acquired the 16-35mm L IS USM Canon lens.  Prior I had been buying highly rated / reviewed 72mm filters.  I've used several of the filter review sites prior to acquiring any UV or Polarizer filters (especially lenstip.com which was very thorough) however I am curious if anyone has (1) any experience with Zykkor or other ND faders from ND2 to ND400 or do you believe carrying individual ND filters is a better way to go?  I've been told the Zykkor's use Hoya glass.  I do have the Hoya ND400 HMC 72mm and the Hoya HMC ND 8 and am fond of these two but I am also keeping in mind and trying to minimize the carrying load if it makes sense.  Thanks in advance.

Axilrod:

--- Quote from: revup67 on January 28, 2012, 04:23:58 PM ---I recently acquired the 16-35mm L IS USM Canon lens.  Prior I had been buying highly rated / reviewed 72mm filters.  I've used several of the filter review sites prior to acquiring any UV or Polarizer filters (especially lenstip.com which was very thorough) however I am curious if anyone has (1) any experience with Zykkor or other ND faders from ND2 to ND400 or do you believe carrying individual ND filters is a better way to go?  I've been told the Zykkor's use Hoya glass.  I do have the Hoya ND400 HMC 72mm and the Hoya HMC ND 8 and am fond of these two but I am also keeping in mind and trying to minimize the carrying load if it makes sense.  Thanks in advance.

--- End quote ---

There is no such thing as a 16-35mm IS.  There is a 16-35mm f/2.8L (version 1) that takes 77mm filters, and a 16-35mm f/2.8L II that takes 82mm filters.  So I'm confused.

As for Fader ND filters, I have a Genus 72mm that I use with all my large aperture primes, it's nice to have the adjustability and being able to shoot wide open in broad daylight.

Axilrod:
Actually I just noticed it says 16-35mm f/2.8L II in your sig, so you need an 82mm. 
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/676826-REG/Genus_GL_GNDF_82_82mm_ND_Neutral_Density.html

neuroanatomist:
As long as you plan on sticking with an APS-C body, an 82mm variable ND would work.  The IQ takes a slight hit relative to a high-quality standard ND, but a good quality vari-ND will be fine.

However, if you plan to go FF, you might want a couple of standard ND filters instead.  Personally, I find that a 3-stop and a 10-stop meet my needs; I have 72mm and 77mm 3-stop and 77mm and 82mm 10-stop filters, all B+W. The 10-stop adds some warmth, which can be corrected by adjusting the WB in post.

The reason I suggest avoiding the vari-ND if you go FF is uneven polarization.  At angles of view wider than 24mm (on FF; wider than 15mm on APS-C), a polarizing filter cannot evenly polarize the entire field - skies are banded dark/light, for example. A vari-ND is a CPL stacked on a linear polarizer - that uneven polarization translates to a 'Maltese cross' artifact, worse at wider angles and greater polarization (darker setting on the vari-ND). 

revup67:
Axilrod - I apologize you were correct in your assumption it is a Mkii and of course there is no IS (what was I thinking) - thanks for the link on the ND but Neuro is correct, going FF soon and purposely got this lens for that reason

Neuro - you are correct and clairvoyant.  My plan to acquire this lens was to wait for the 5D Mkiii.  So it appears sticking with a straight ND is the way to go.  I was just informed Hoya does not make an ND400 in the US for an 82mm size so seeking out substitutes at the moment but not a Filter holder type such as Cokin, prefer a screw on.  Open for recommendations for a 9 or 10 stop screw on for 82mm ND.

Question: (perhaps absurd), the glass on the 16-35 mkii does not go edge to edge.  can you use a step down ring from 82 to 72 on an APS-C and/or FF camera?  I have a 72mm ND400 at present.   I suspect the answer is "no" and there is a reason - thanks in advance

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version