Canon 8-15mm and filters

[Haydn1971]

Had a play with a Canon 8-15mm and 10-22mm at the weekend, liked the 10-22mm until I handled and viewed the wide aspect of the 8-15mm on my crop body.  I'm warming towards getting my second L lens right now, want an ultra wide and already have 15mm rectalinier in the 15-85mm I already own.  The slight niggle I have on returning home is thinking about the use of ND gel filters for long exposures, what the deal, are they difficult to use, are the gel filters flimsy film, inflexible plates are somewhere in-between ?

Thoughts please ?

[Random Orbits]

Are you planning on keeping the images from the 8-15 with the fisheye perspective or are you post-processing in SW to make it look rectilinear?  If you are planning to use SW to make it look rectilinear, I'd suggest sticking with the 10-22.  You lose a lot a detail from the fisheye when it is stretched especially away from the center.

The advantage to lenses like the 10-22 is that it will take screw on filters or filter systems, which will allow you to more easily use grad NDs if you are into landscape photography heavily.  The 8-15 is a sweet lens, but for most people, a UWA zoom like the 10-22 is more practical.

[neuroanatomist]

You'll probably be on a tripod...get large, rectangular filters (Lee, Singh-Ray, or the only glass ones - the Schneider MPTV line).  Handhold them, or if you prefer, use one or two Wimberley Plamps to hold them in place clamped to a tripod leg.

[TexPhoto]

You'll probably be on a tripod...get large, rectangular filters (Lee, Singh-Ray, or the only glass ones - the Schneider MPTV line).  Handhold them, or if you prefer, use one or two Wimberley Plamps to hold them in place clamped to a tripod leg.

That won't work for a couple of reasons.  With 180 degree field of view, no filter is going to be large enough, even if presses against the from element.  And, as you get past about 45 degrees of incidence, the light falls way off and is more distorted by the filter.

No experience with ND gel filters, but looking at the back of my 8-15, they should be easy to put in there.

[Haydn1971]

Given I'm on crop, I'm likely to transform some of the wider shots, but generally looking at using them optically unchanged, other than tweaks in Lightroom.

The 10-22mm does appear to offer great optics, but I can't help thinking I'd end up replacing it at some point in the future, whereas the 8-15mm will probably stay with me for decades - I'm a firm believer of buy once in the hi-fi world, but being new to the DSLR market in 2008, I entered in with limited knowledge, gradually built over the last few years and now happy to apply the buy once mantra to future purchases.

My biggest negative on the 10-22mm is that it just doesn't feel like several hundred £'s in my hands, whereas my f2 135mm L and to a lesser degree my 15-85mm do....   I'm not convinced that I'll go full frame now, but haven't ruled it out and will see where I am when I feel my 450D isn't giving me what I want or fails...

Its the internal ND gel filters I'm interested in, don't intend to use grads or others...   thinking longer 10-30 second exposures of nature, roads and civil engineering...

[neuroanatomist]

With 180 degree field of view, no filter is going to be large enough, even if presses against the from element. 

Good catch, thanks!

FWIW, the 10-22mm is an excellent UWA lens (despite how light it feels in your hand - the bottom line is that a small image circle, relatively slow aperture, and short focal length mean there's just not a lot of glass required, thus the lens is light).  Much less barrel distortion than the 16-35L which is the FF-equivalent AoV. 

Before getting a FF camera and 16-35L, I had the 10-22mm - I sold it for just $50 less than I paid (bought new from Amazon) after a year of use, pretty cheap 'rental'.