UV filter on the new 16-35 f/4?

[Jack56]

I can imagine that this question has been on the forum before. I am sorry if so.
I've bought the new 16-35 f/4. I was recommended to put a B+W Slim 010 UV 77 E MRC filter on the front especially for protection. But this filter isn't available (can't find it on the net either).
Do you use a protection filter or .......

 

[candyman]

Yes, I do.
B+W 007 MRC Nano XS-Pro Digital 77mm E

Edit: you can also use Hoya UV Filter 77mm HD

 

[Jack56]

Thanks for your reply. Is this a slim version (for no vignetting) and can you still use your lenscap?

 

[candyman]

Thanks for your reply. Is this a slim version (for no vignetting) and can you still use your lenscap?

It is a neutral clear filter to prevent vignetting when using wide angle lenses. You can still use your lenscap.

EDIT:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/756817-REG/

 

[Jack56]

Thank you very much!!

 

[neuroanatomist]

The XS-Pro mount is slim, but with a front thread.

According to TDP, a standard B+W UV (F-Pro) does not cause additional vignetting, and it's cheaper...

 

[Menace]

Yes, I do.
B+W 007 MRC Nano XS-Pro Digital 77mm E

+1 for B+W

 

[neuroanatomist]

Also, the 16-35/4L IS actually requires a filter to complete the weather sealing.

 

[Vossie]

I can imagine that this question has been on the forum before. I am sorry if so.
I've bought the new 16-35 f/4. I was recommended to put a B+W Slim 010 UV 77 E MRC filter on the front especially for protection. But this filter isn't available (can't find it on the net either).
Do you use a protection filter or .......

If you put a filter on, remember to take it off when you take photographs.

??

 

[Menace]

I can imagine that this question has been on the forum before. I am sorry if so.
I've bought the new 16-35 f/4. I was recommended to put a B+W Slim 010 UV 77 E MRC filter on the front especially for protection. But this filter isn't available (can't find it on the net either).
Do you use a protection filter or .......

If you put a filter on, remember to take it off when you take photographs.

??

??

 

[lycan]

I can imagine that this question has been on the forum before. I am sorry if so.
I've bought the new 16-35 f/4. I was recommended to put a B+W Slim 010 UV 77 E MRC filter on the front especially for protection. But this filter isn't available (can't find it on the net either).
Do you use a protection filter or .......

If you put a filter on, remember to take it off when you take photographs.

;D I couldn't have said any better. You're right.

 

[neuroanatomist]

If you put a filter on, remember to take it off when you take photographs.

Spoken like a true troll.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

Yes, I do.
B+W 007 MRC Nano XS-Pro Digital 77mm E

Edit: you can also use Hoya UV Filter 77mm HD

+1 I also got this B+W filter and it's the best for my new 16-35mm f4L IS

 

[Phenix205]

I found that I've had a polarizer on this lens 90% of the time for landscaping since I got it three weeks ago. So I essentially am using the polarizer as the protective filter and only use a UV filter during low light shooting.

 

[infared]

Thanks for your reply. Is this a slim version (for no vignetting) and can you still use your lenscap?

It is a neutral clear filter to prevent vignetting when using wide angle lenses. You can still use your lenscap.

EDIT:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/756817-REG/

Jack this is what I used on my new 16-35mm IS ..These are always the best in my opinion, too. I have noticed no additional vignetting from the filter.

 

[RLPhoto]

I can imagine that this question has been on the forum before. I am sorry if so.
I've bought the new 16-35 f/4. I was recommended to put a B+W Slim 010 UV 77 E MRC filter on the front especially for protection. But this filter isn't available (can't find it on the net either).
Do you use a protection filter or .......

If you put a filter on, remember to take it off when you take photographs.

??

??

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml
the better your lens, the more desirable it is not to have a filter on it

Right because all my L glass has filters on them and haven't been able to take a single photo with them. : : : Some people.... smh...

 

[Eagle Eye]

Guys, remember, when you're ready to shoot a photo, remove the front glass elements from your lens. Actually, just remove the lens. It may be best to take the camera away, too. Guys, when you're ready to take a photo, just look with your eye.

 

[Ruined]

Yes, you might get a small (VERY small) additional amount of flare with a B+W XS-Pro Clear multicoated 007m filter. There really is no other tangible impact on IQ.

But, in exchange you get:

* Weather-sealing: both the 16-35 f/4L IS and the 16-35 f/2.8L II are *not* weather sealed without a filter.

* Ease of cleaning: Got some crud on the clear filter? Spit shine it with your shirt! If you scratch it, the investment to replace is minimal. Busting out a microfiber cloth in the field isn't always practical.

* Virtual lens cap: sometimes during sessions you need to swap between two cameras quickly. Would you want to throw a camera in a bag - or have it in a holster - with no lens cap? Well, assuming you don't drop your bag on concrete, for these fast swaps there is little risk if you put a capless lens/camera in a bag if it has a filter. One shouldn't make a habit of this, but its an option you generally would not have without a filter.

* Riskier shots: 16mm on full frame may require you to get VERY close to what you want to photograph in some cases. Do you want to risk your unprotected front element in these cases? How about action shots, if you are photographing in harsh elements, or just greater confidence in general since you don't have to worry about your lens?

* In reality, it does cost a lot to fix the front element of a lens, and you will lose use of the lens while its being repaired: While some blogs have pointed out that the cost of a front element is not always that much, the labor to replace it usually is large amount and it involves your lens being out of action while getting repaired. If you are getting paid, this is not a situation you want to be in.

In my opinion, the benefits FAR outweigh the very minimal additional flare you might get with a quality filter. If you are shooting pictures of the moon at night, that is one situation I can think of where you might want to pass on a filter due to the extremely bright/dark transition (high contrast) subject matter being the focus of the picture. Every other situation, keep it on. That is, assuming you buy a good one - I only use the B+W XS-Pro Clear MRC 007m as it is color-neutral, multicoated, and very slim.

 

[YuengLinger]

Yes, you might get a small (VERY small) additional amount of flare with a B+W XS-Pro Clear multicoated 007m filter. There really is no other tangible impact on IQ.

But, in exchange you get:

* Weather-sealing: both the 16-35 f/4L IS and the 16-35 f/2.8L II are *not* weather sealed without a filter.

* Ease of cleaning: Got some crud on the clear filter? Spit shine it with your shirt! If you scratch it, the investment to replace is minimal. Busting out a microfiber cloth in the field isn't always practical.

* Virtual lens cap: sometimes during sessions you need to swap between two cameras quickly. Would you want to throw a camera in a bag - or have it in a holster - with no lens cap? Well, assuming you don't drop your bag on concrete, for these fast swaps there is little risk if you put a capless lens/camera in a bag if it has a filter. One shouldn't make a habit of this, but its an option you generally would not have without a filter.

* Riskier shots: 16mm on full frame may require you to get VERY close to what you want to photograph in some cases. Do you want to risk your unprotected front element in these cases? How about action shots, if you are photographing in harsh elements, or just greater confidence in general since you don't have to worry about your lens?

* In reality, it does cost a lot to fix the front element of a lens, and you will lose use of the lens while its being repaired: While some blogs have pointed out that the cost of a front element is not always that much, the labor to replace it usually is large amount and it involves your lens being out of action while getting repaired. If you are getting paid, this is not a situation you want to be in.

In my opinion, the benefits FAR outweigh the very minimal additional flare you might get with a quality filter. If you are shooting pictures of the moon at night, that is one situation I can think of where you might want to pass on a filter due to the extremely bright/dark transition (high contrast) subject matter being the focus of the picture. Every other situation, keep it on. That is, assuming you buy a good one - I only use the B+W XS-Pro Clear MRC 007m as it is color-neutral, multicoated, and very slim.

Exactly!

Canon recommends filters on L series, which carries more weight than OCD fretting over invisible lmpact on IQ.

Geeze' when somebody wants advice on gear or techniques that bug you, just let it go. Silly old debate.

And +1 for B+W!

 

[Khalai]

B+W 007 MRC Nano XS-Pro Digital 77mm E

+1

007 line of B+W filters are clear (i.e. no UV or IR filtering capabilities), just for protection. There is no need for additional UV and/or IR filtering with modern cameras anymore. I use these on my lenses as well...