Lee Filters Announces EF 11-24mm f/4L Support

[lightcreator]

There is NiSi Nano 180mm system that will let you use the EF 11-24mm in full range.
(Not just 13.5mm with 2 filters and 12.5mm with 1 filter).

There is NiSi Nano 150mm system that will let you use the TS-E 17mm with all tilt and shift movements + 82mm Step Down Ring Adaptor (not just like 7 or 8 degree movement instead of 11 degree?).

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Why do UWA lenses with bulbous front elements not all come standard with a rear filter slot?

It has a rear filter slot. Just not as flexible as filtering the front.

ah, OK. Excellent. Should work at least for non-graduated ND filters including "stopper" filters. Graduated ND would be difficult/limited. Pol filters I am not sure how often they really can be useful on lenses with such extremely wide FOV. At least if there is blue sky involved in a shot pol filters never worked for me.

Yep -- you don't use polarizers at these kind of focal lengths for sky management. If you did, that nasty polarizer sky darkening / pseudo-vignetting occurs.

But ultra wide angle users still need polarizers to tame reflections -- for landscapes with water, or for interiors with a lot of glass.

- A

I regularly use ultra wides with a polariser...you just choose where to put the dark spot for composition balance. Even with out a polariser, the sky at 11mm has a huge variation in brightness.

 

[Eldar]

Why do UWA lenses with bulbous front elements not all come standard with a rear filter slot?

It has a rear filter slot. Just not as flexible as filtering the front.

ah, OK. Excellent. Should work at least for non-graduated ND filters including "stopper" filters. Graduated ND would be difficult/limited. Pol filters I am not sure how often they really can be useful on lenses with such extremely wide FOV. At least if there is blue sky involved in a shot pol filters never worked for me.

Yep -- you don't use polarizers at these kind of focal lengths for sky management. If you did, that nasty polarizer sky darkening / pseudo-vignetting occurs.

But ultra wide angle users still need polarizers to tame reflections -- for landscapes with water, or for interiors with a lot of glass.

- A

I regularly use ultra wides with a polariser...you just choose where to put the dark spot for composition balance. Even with out a polariser, the sky at 11mm has a huge variation in brightness.

+1
I have the polariser on my Zeiss 15/2.8 75% of the time. A lot of people seem to believe that polarisers should not be used wider than 24mm, because of uneven blue skies. A GMC says, pay some attention to where you put the dark spot, accept a minor post processing job and you get your rewards.

 

[PhotographyFirst]

It really bugs me that Canon decided to go 11mm and f4 instead of 14mm and f2.8 with this ens. I hope they offer a 14-24 f2.8 in the future. If I ever went back to full frame cameras, I would need the Nikon 14-24 to match the AOV of my Sigma 8-16, while gaining considerable aperture speed. I don't see there being enough landscape photographers using the 11-24 lens to justify having Lee produce a whole new system for this lens. So far it seems to be limited to people who wanted a new 11mm toy to play with and architecture photographers who are already stitching images to get super wide.

 

[PhotographyFirst]

Why do UWA lenses with bulbous front elements not all come standard with a rear filter slot?

It has a rear filter slot. Just not as flexible as filtering the front.

ah, OK. Excellent. Should work at least for non-graduated ND filters including "stopper" filters. Graduated ND would be difficult/limited. Pol filters I am not sure how often they really can be useful on lenses with such extremely wide FOV. At least if there is blue sky involved in a shot pol filters never worked for me.

Yep -- you don't use polarizers at these kind of focal lengths for sky management. If you did, that nasty polarizer sky darkening / pseudo-vignetting occurs.

But ultra wide angle users still need polarizers to tame reflections -- for landscapes with water, or for interiors with a lot of glass.

- A

I regularly use ultra wides with a polariser...you just choose where to put the dark spot for composition balance. Even with out a polariser, the sky at 11mm has a huge variation in brightness.

+1
I have the polariser on my Zeiss 15/2.8 75% of the time. A lot of people seem to believe that polarisers should not be used wider than 24mm, because of uneven blue skies. A GMC says, pay some attention to where you put the dark spot, accept a minor post processing job and you get your rewards.

Shooting the sky with a polarizing filter is bad news regardless of focal length.

 

[ahsanford]

There is NiSi Nano 180mm system that will let you use the EF 11-24mm in full range.
(Not just 13.5mm with 2 filters and 12.5mm with 1 filter).

There is NiSi Nano 150mm system that will let you use the TS-E 17mm with all tilt and shift movements + 82mm Step Down Ring Adaptor (not just like 7 or 8 degree movement instead of 11 degree?).

Thanks for the tip! That's a good forward.

Company is here: http://www.nisidigital.com/en/

The product in question is the 180mm NiSi with some 11-24 specific plate or component, but I can only find it on non-major-retailers, like here: http://www.lcdscreenparts.com/nisi-180mm-aluminum-filter-holder-system-for-canon-ef-11-24mm-f-4l-usm-wide-angle-zoom-lens.html
(there is a video)

Looks like a pre-release product at this time. But I have to wonder how it magically will cover 11mm.

Consider:

16mm or greater --> works with 100mm filters (the flagship Lee SW100 system)

14mm --> required 150mm filters (the special Nikon 14-24 driven Lee SW 150 system)

And going only 30mm wider is supposed to magically cover all the way down to 11mm focal length? That seems smaller than what you'd expect. Does anyone have a PDF/manual or proper web page on this product?

- A

 

[ahsanford]

It really bugs me that Canon decided to go 11mm and f4 instead of 14mm and f2.8 with this ens. I hope they offer a 14-24 f2.8 in the future. If I ever went back to full frame cameras, I would need the Nikon 14-24 to match the AOV of my Sigma 8-16, while gaining considerable aperture speed. I don't see there being enough landscape photographers using the 11-24 lens to justify having Lee produce a whole new system for this lens. So far it seems to be limited to people who wanted a new 11mm toy to play with and architecture photographers who are already stitching images to get super wide.

I actually applaud Canon for not chasing 14-24 f/2.8. There's a reason Canon has multiple 16-35 UWA lenses -- going even 1mm wider makes front-filtering a real PITA. Just ask Tamron, who absolutely idiotically went 15-30 instead of 16-35 at the cost of a front filter ring.

I recognize that Canon landscapers aren't buying f/2.8 lenses so much these days, but that 1 extra mm wider for Tamron just made front filtering a ton messier to do, so that 15-30 becomes relegated to event / sports / astro work in my mind. Tamron would have sold a boatload more lenses if it was just a 16-35 f/2.8 VC -- they'd gobble up so many 16-35 f/2.8L II folks dreaming of a sharper lens (or IS for video).

- A

 

[Sabaki]

Silly question here? But when we say vignetting, is it traditional vignetting or is it the lens mechanism creeping into the shot?

If its just normal vignetting, are we not making a big hoopla about something that can be corrected in post?

 

[rs]

Silly question here? But when we say vignetting, is it traditional vignetting or is it the lens mechanism creeping into the shot?

If its just normal vignetting, are we not making a big hoopla about something that can be corrected in post?

It is mechanical vignetting (hard transition from image to nothing) caused by the filter mechanism creeping into the shot. This will not be possible to correct in post.

 

[moreorless]

Wow, lots of gear, lots of hassle, lots of expenses to convert an 11mm lens into a 12.5mm or 13.5mm lens. AmazingLEE weird business model.

The larger system isn't just designed for the Canon 11-24mm though and as has been mentioned when you get this wide its probably not going to be your main landscape use the way say a 16-35mm is at the wide end.

 

[ahsanford]

Silly question here? But when we say vignetting, is it traditional vignetting or is it the lens mechanism creeping into the shot?

If its just normal vignetting, are we not making a big hoopla about something that can be corrected in post?

Not a stupid question at all. We're talking about the front filtering element's componentry (see attached) blocking the actual field of view. This is principally a non-issue for full-frame FL above 20mm or so (it depends on the lens, how much stuff you stack, etc.), but is a major issue for ultrawide lenses.

It's also nearly impossible to remove in post as it's a wicked/hard black chop of the corner. You can clone it out if you have very very even skies or foreground, but it's nothing like amplifiying a slightly darker corner from lens vignetting. You also can crop it out entirely, but you're effectively zooming in that case (unless the shot works with a major aspect ratio change).

- A

 

[AvTvM]

Things would also be a hell of a lot easier if Canon would build the 11-24 with a regular removable lens hood instead of the stupid non-removable fixed crap.

 

[privatebydesign]

Things would also be a hell of a lot easier if Canon would build the 11-24 with a regular removable lens hood instead of the stupid non-removable fixed crap.

No that wouldn't make any difference, the front element comes pretty close to the hood depth, it follows the contours of the side petals.

 

[AvTvM]

Things would also be a hell of a lot easier if Canon would build the 11-24 with a regular removable lens hood instead of the stupid non-removable fixed crap.

No that wouldn't make any difference, the front element comes pretty close to the hood depth, it follows the contours of the side petals.

It would save a few millimeters. Each one of them extremely precious.

 

[pcho]

Got my new Lee SW150 ring adapter for my 11-24mm Zoom. I love it.

Perry

 

[privatebydesign]

Got my new Lee SW150 ring adapter for my 11-24mm Zoom. I love it.

Perry

True it looks like a nicely engineered piece of kit, but the functionality is so compromised I can't see the point and I won't be getting one. I have the Wonderpana for my TS-E17 and the only filter I use is a polarizer to control reflections.

I am more inclined to the Nisi 180 system that doesn't compromise the functionality of the 11-24 but they will have to bring out a TS-E17 mount so I am only carrying one huge filter system, they have an 11-24 and TS-E17 mounts for the 150 system size, but only the 11-24 so far in the 180.

 

[pcho]

Got my new Lee SW150 ring adapter for my 11-24mm Zoom. I love it.

Perry

True it looks like a nicely engineered piece of kit, but the functionality is so compromised I can't see the point and I won't be getting one. I have the Wonderpana for my TS-E17 and the only filter I use is a polarizer to control reflections.

I am more inclined to the Nisi 180 system that doesn't compromise the functionality of the 11-24 but they will have to bring out a TS-E17 mount so I am only carrying one huge filter system, they have an 11-24 and TS-E17 mounts for the 150 system size, but only the 11-24 so far in the 180.

I have most of the filters in the SW150, .3,.6,.9 both in Hard and soft, Polarising, Big and little stopper.As some have said, I am happy that I can shoot to 12.5mm as I seldom shoot at the extreme 11mm. That said it would be good if I could.
I have the Zeiss 15mm, the Canon 14mm MKll, 17tse all using the the Fotopdiox filter ring with the Lee SW150 filter holder. The fotodiox and Lee comnbination works really well for me
Perry

 

[privatebydesign]

I can see everybody will end up with their own solutions for their particular needs depending on the lenses they own, the filters they need, and the ones they already have, with a filter set like yours I'd take the vignetting too .

At least we don't have the Frankenhood mess people were doing initially for the TS-E17, the engineering looks really good.

I blend most of my PL shots so don't think vignetting will be an issue, indeed I have used the 145mm CPL from my Wonderpana TS-E17 to knock back some reflections so far by just holding it in front of the lens.........

 

[pcho]

Hi privatebydesign,

I havent heard of NISI brand before. I just went to have a look and I am impressed. I may get the NISI 180 too just for the heck of it . Are the filters any good? Can you provide a link please to a place that I can depend on to purchase this product?
Thank you
Perry

 

[privatebydesign]

Sorry pcho,

I have no first hand experience with Nisi yet, and like I say I am not too interested in following through with them until they make both the 11-24 and the TS-E17 for the 180 system, and then I'll only get the CPL.

But if you get one please leave some feedback, I am sure there are a few people out there interested, there certainly were when I was an early adopter on the Wonderpana because it allowed so much more movement than the Lee solution did even though it uses a smaller filter.