Best filter for 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
C

canon23

Mar 1, 2012
101
0
6,056
#1
Guys, I'm going to get this lens and was wondering for the Photogs out there that owns and uses this lens, what's the best lens filter for this? Please advise and thanks for your help!

Sorry...purpose basically is for: Front element protection & Polarizing the incoming light...but mainly for Front element protection w/o degrading much of the quality. Thanks.
 
#2
Best filter for what? Front element protection? Adding a starburst effect to points of light in your image? Polarizing the incoming light? Achieving a slow shutter speed for waterfalls? Softening the image for that special Star Trek-like dreamy glow?

More specifics, please...
 
Upvote 0
#3
canon23 said:
Guys, I'm going to get this lens and was wondering for the Photogs out there that owns and uses this lens, what's the best lens filter for this? Please advise and thanks for your help!

Sorry...purpose basically is for: Front element protection & Polarizing the incoming light...but mainly for Front element protection w/o degrading much of the quality. Thanks.
Click to expand...

For all screw on lens filters I use B+W, specifically the XS-Pro series with Nano coating. I have the UV on all the time and also use the polarizer. A little pricey, but IMO the best.
 
Upvote 0
#7
canon23 said:
Guys, I'm going to get this lens and was wondering for the Photogs out there that owns and uses this lens, what's the best lens filter for this? Please advise and thanks for your help!

Sorry...purpose basically is for: Front element protection & Polarizing the incoming light...but mainly for Front element protection w/o degrading much of the quality. Thanks.
Click to expand...
if you really must use a UV filter use b&w or hoya hd the same goes for polarisers these are the two most common purchased filters aswell as nd filters.
 
Upvote 0
#8
If someone asked for a lens recommendation, without stating what they wanted to shoot or use the lens for, wouldn't a request for clarification make sense? B+W offers close to 200 different 77mm filters which could be mounted on the 70-200 II - that's more filters in the catalog than Canon has current lenses.

Sorry, bornshooter, but can you please explain how you think it's at all inappropriate to ask for clarification on use?

Note: after my post, the OP edited the initial post to clarify the intended use.
 
Upvote 0
#9
canon23 said:
Sorry...purpose basically is for: Front element protection & Polarizing the incoming light...but mainly for Front element protection w/o degrading much of the quality.
Click to expand...

In that case, I'd echo Razor2012's and subsequent recommendations. For protection, a B+W XS-Pro Nano, either UV or clear (there's no optical difference for use on a dSLR, so pick whichever is cheaper or more easily available for you). For polarization, a B+W Käsemann CPL.

Don't get a CPL for both - I sometimes see people leaving the CPL on all the time, not realizing it's costing them ~1.75 stops of light.
 
Upvote 0
#10
I used to use High End B+W 010 MC Filters on all my lenses but they were a real pain to clean in my opinion. It was very difficult get rid of streaks.

I switched over to Hoya UV Pro 1 which are 1/3 the cost, clean streak free without much trouble.... and If I ding one up (which I have) its only 1/3 the cost of the B+W to replace it. Also there is really no difference in IQ between the two brands' high end line.

That said I use B+W Kaismann circular polarizer when needed.

FYI: Lens cleaners that contain alcohol or other chemicals should be avoided for cleaning lenses with coatings. The coatings break down over time and can affect your image. Use only water or hoodman makes an enzyme wipe that is a wet/dry combo. It is very expensive (relatively) at $1 per wipe but does a superb job and one wipe will clean all of your lenses....
 
Upvote 0
#11
canon816 said:
I used to use High End B+W 010 MC Filters on all my lenses but they were a real pain to clean in my opinion. It was very difficult get rid of streaks.

I switched over to Hoya UV Pro 1 which are 1/3 the cost, clean streak free without much trouble.... and If I ding one up (which I have) its only 1/3 the cost of the B+W to replace it. Also there is really no difference in IQ between the two brands' high end line.

That said I use B+W Kaismann circular polarizer when needed.

FYI: Lens cleaners that contain alcohol or other chemicals should be avoided for cleaning lenses with coatings. The coatings break down over time and can affect your image. Use only water or hoodman makes an enzyme wipe that is a wet/dry combo. It is very expensive (relatively) at $1 per wipe but does a superb job and one wipe will clean all of your lenses....
Click to expand...

The XS-Pro's with Nano coating seem to clean very well. I haven't had any problems with them.
 
Upvote 0
#13
I am thinking about buying that lens in a few months. I always use b+w filters on everything. For the 70-200, I would think a regular F-Pro mount B+W wouldnt cause vignetting. I have never used that lens though. The F-pro mount is 5mm thick I believe.

For protection buy one of their clear multicoated. You can get it in UV haze or no UV haze. I usually buy the cheaper one but lean towards the no UV haze version.

No Haze-http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/475495-REG/B_W_661001705_77mm_007_Protection_Clear.html ~$79

Haze-http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11994-REG/B_W_66_070252_77mm_UV_Haze_010.html
~$70
At 10 dollar difference I would buy the no haze.

For the polarizer, I bought a top notch one with my first lens and use step rings for all my other lenses. If you need more than one great polarizer, buying the 82mm and stepping down is the way to go especially if you plan on using canon's 16-35mm 2.8L II or the upcoming 24-70 2.8l IS II.

(B+W 82mm Kaesemann XS-Pro Circular Polarizer MRC Nano Filter) ~$250
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/752977-REG/B_W_1066401_82mm_XS_Pro_Digital_MC.html

(B+W 77mm Kaesemann Circular Polarizer MRC Filter) ~$144
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/10889-REG/B_W_66_045620_77mm_Kaeseman_Circular_Polarizing.html
 
Upvote 0
#14
HoneyBadger said:
For the 70-200, I would think a regular F-Pro mount B+W wouldnt cause vignetting. I have never used that lens though. The F-pro mount is 5mm thick I believe.
Click to expand...

I didn't think it would, either. Then I checked mine, and it does. There was a thread on this a while back, I posted some test images in this post.
 
Upvote 0
#16
So wait guys, is the
B+W 77 XS-Pro UV MRC-Nano 010M Filter
and
"I am thinking about buying that lens in a few months. I always use b+w filters on everything. For the 70-200, I would think a regular F-Pro mount B+W wouldnt cause vignetting. I have never used that lens though. The F-pro mount is 5mm thick I believe."

the same? Will I have vignetting problems w/the B+W 77 XS-Pro UV MRC-Nano 010M Filter? Please advise...I'm about in put in an order. Thanks!!
 
Upvote 0
#17
Get the XS-Pro (this one). The XS-Pro mount is 3.4mm thick, the standard (F-Pro) mount is 5mm thick. The F-pro results in a flight increase in vignetting, the XS-Pro does not. Avoid the Slim mount, since that doesn't have front threads (meaning you can't use the pinch cap that comes with the lens, you need to use the slip-on cap that comes with the filter - personally, I find those annoying for a filter that will stay on the lens almost all the time, although I do use Slim CPL filters).
 
Upvote 0
#20
neuroanatomist said:
Get the XS-Pro (this one). The XS-Pro mount is 3.4mm thick, the standard (F-Pro) mount is 5mm thick. The F-pro results in a flight increase in vignetting, the XS-Pro does not. Avoid the Slim mount, since that doesn't have front threads (meaning you can't use the pinch cap that comes with the lens, you need to use the slip-on cap that comes with the filter - personally, I find those annoying for a filter that will stay on the lens almost all the time, although I do use Slim CPL filters).
Click to expand...

Agreed, I didn't care much for not being able to use my pinch caps, plus I felt they were easier to lose. With the Slim CPL's it probably doesn't matter as you can mount them on top of the UV then take it off again (those suckers can get stuck though).
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

a.jiang
Traveling with the 400mm f/2.8?
Replies
38
Views
23K
ssaibal
S
Canon Rumors
Stock Notice: Canon RF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM
Replies
0
Views
2K
Canon Rumors
Canon Rumors
puffo25
Canon EF 24-70mm F/2.8L II USM vs RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM
Replies
23
Views
26K
SO8
S
Canon Rumors
Images and Information About the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III and EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II
Replies
70
Views
19K
Michael Clark
Michael Clark
ahsanford
TDP Image Quality posted -- 70-200 f/4L IS II: it's not much better
Replies
34
Views
7K
slclick
slclick
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu