Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 10 Apr 2013 (Wednesday) 23:17
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 300 f4 Should I put a filter on it???

 
oscardog
Senior Member
356 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Long Beach, Ca
     
Apr 10, 2013 23:17 |  #1

Well I just bought a new lens from a member on this site and im waiting for it in the mail. And im sorry if im bringing up an old debate but I just bought myself a canon 300 f4 IS and got to thinking... Should i get some sort of filter to protect my most expensive purchase???

I never used filters because of what ive read about IQ degredation with them, but now that I bought (for me) a very expensive lens I feel like I should do something more than the built in hood? Would a good filter be worth it, and what might be a good 77mm filter for my new lens? Well if you have any ideas let me know, thanks.


Gear: 6D, 7d Mark II, Rokinon 14mm 2.8, Canon 16-35 f4 IS, Sigma 24mm 1.8, Canon 70-200 f4 (non IS), Sigma 500 4.5 DG, Kenko 1.4x & 2x converters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Sir_Loin
Senior Member
Avatar
517 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 55
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Leicestershire UK
     
Apr 11, 2013 00:20 |  #2

The first element on the 300mm f/4.0L IS is actually a flat protective piece of glass which can be cheaply and easily replaced in case of damage so it's not worth shelling out for a filter in my opinion. Enjoy your new gear!


EOS-1D MkIV, EOS 5D MkIII, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, EF 24mm f/1.4L II, EF 50mm f/1.8 MkI, EF 50mm f/1.8 STM, EF 85mm f/1.2L II, EF 100mm Macro f/2.8L IS, EF 300mm f/4.0L IS, Extender EF 1.4x II * EOS M5, EOS M3, EF-M 11-22mm f/4.0-5.6 IS, EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS, EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS, EF-M 22mm f/2.0, EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS * Speedlite 580EX II, Speedlite 430EX III-RT, Speedlite 270EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
swampass2
Member
Avatar
188 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Bandon, OR
     
Apr 11, 2013 00:39 |  #3

My 2 cents (as the guy who sold you the lens) the hood on this lens is very deep. I generally use clear filters unless I'm shooting in extreme lighting but with this lens protection isn't much of a concern. Enjoy the new lens!


5D2 | 7D | 8-15L (for sale) | 17-40L | 17-55 (for sale) | 24-70L II | 24-105L | Σ 35 | 50/1.8 | Σ 85 | 70-200/2.8L IS II | Peleng 8mm fisheye (for sale) | Lensbaby Composer (for sale) | Kenko Pro TC's

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
oscardog
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
356 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Long Beach, Ca
     
Apr 11, 2013 00:48 |  #4

Wow you guys are awesome! I guess im good to go.
Thats really interesting to hear Sir_Loin. thanks
Swampass2 I cant wait to get that thing!!! Thanks for responding as well.


Gear: 6D, 7d Mark II, Rokinon 14mm 2.8, Canon 16-35 f4 IS, Sigma 24mm 1.8, Canon 70-200 f4 (non IS), Sigma 500 4.5 DG, Kenko 1.4x & 2x converters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
22,942 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 352
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 11, 2013 01:02 |  #5

Sir_Loin wrote in post #15814649 (external link)
The first element on the 300mm f/4.0L IS is actually a flat protective piece of glass which can be cheaply and easily replaced in case of damage so it's not worth shelling out for a filter in my opinion. Enjoy your new gear!

are you sure the 300m f4 has a meniscus? even if it does I doubt it would be "cheap" to replace. I know that has been parroted so often on camera forums that it has become "truth" but I paid more than $300 for a simple calibration on my 24-105L.

so unless someone can show me a receipt all I hear is parrots ;).


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L, gitzo GM4562, markins Q10, markins Q3, kirk, really right stuff, sirui

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike ­ Deep
Goldmember
Avatar
1,864 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 707
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
     
Apr 11, 2013 01:13 |  #6

The 300/4 has a meniscus (external link).* A filter will still be cheaper to replace.

EDIT: *A flat protective element, I should say


www.mikedeep.com (external link) | SportsShooter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
22,942 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 352
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 11, 2013 01:20 |  #7

Mike Deep wrote in post #15814736 (external link)
The 300/4 has a meniscus (external link). A filter will still be cheaper to replace.

thanks Mike. a filter is a matter of choice but I would be inclined not to use one if the lens already has a meniscus. I would just have to remember to use the lens cap when the built-on hood is retracted.

actually what I hear said by the anti-filter guys is a front element is "cheap" to replace. i'd have to see a receipt because i'll bet labor alone would be a couple hundred.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L, gitzo GM4562, markins Q10, markins Q3, kirk, really right stuff, sirui

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike ­ Deep
Goldmember
Avatar
1,864 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 707
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
     
Apr 11, 2013 01:27 |  #8

Agreed on both counts. I don't view filters as necessary on long lenses except in remote circumstances.


www.mikedeep.com (external link) | SportsShooter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,511 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Aug 2008
     
Apr 11, 2013 05:26 |  #9

Logic and common sense has been achieved in 8 posts. That's some kind of record. To the OP... If you want to protect your investment, just make certain you always use your built in lens hood. The built in hoods on the 300mm f4 and 400mm 5.6 are outstanding and very handy.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Avatar
5,265 posts
Gallery: 99 photos
Likes: 2586
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Apr 11, 2013 05:53 |  #10

nightcat wrote in post #15815044 (external link)
Logic and common sense has been achieved in 8 posts. That's some kind of record. To the OP... If you want to protect your investment, just make certain you always use your built in lens hood. The built in hoods on the 300mm f4 and 400mm 5.6 are outstanding and very handy.

No it hasn't :) Just a small niggle.
OP says he bought a 300 F4 IS. It has a protective glass element but it is not meniscus. EF Lens Work III states only the 300 2.8 has meniscus protective element, not the F4 IS. (the drawing also shows flat element)

Also the big lineup - 500 F4/600F4/400 F2.8/400 DO


Dave
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/12185187@N00/ (external link)
1DX2, 1D4, 1DS2. Canon, Sigma lenses
Image editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 84
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Apr 11, 2013 06:07 |  #11

ed rader wrote in post #15814743 (external link)
actually what I hear said by the anti-filter guys is a front element is "cheap" to replace. i'd have to see a receipt because i'll bet labor alone would be a couple hundred.

Or you could buy a replacement front element ($170 for a 17-55) and do it yourself. LINK.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sir_Loin
Senior Member
Avatar
517 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 55
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Leicestershire UK
     
Apr 11, 2013 06:37 |  #12

ed rader wrote in post #15814712 (external link)
are you sure the 300m f4 has a meniscus? even if it does I doubt it would be "cheap" to replace. I know that has been parroted so often on camera forums that it has become "truth" but I paid more than $300 for a simple calibration on my 24-105L.

so unless someone can show me a receipt all I hear is parrots ;).

OK, I'll clarify my post. The first element is a flat piece of glass, not meniscus. It would be "relatively" cheap to replace compared to a shaped or meniscus element. You could do it yourself after acquiring the part as there's only a locking ring holding it in place. Happy? ;).

Pretty Polly! :D


EOS-1D MkIV, EOS 5D MkIII, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, EF 24mm f/1.4L II, EF 50mm f/1.8 MkI, EF 50mm f/1.8 STM, EF 85mm f/1.2L II, EF 100mm Macro f/2.8L IS, EF 300mm f/4.0L IS, Extender EF 1.4x II * EOS M5, EOS M3, EF-M 11-22mm f/4.0-5.6 IS, EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS, EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS, EF-M 22mm f/2.0, EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS * Speedlite 580EX II, Speedlite 430EX III-RT, Speedlite 270EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
darosk
Goldmember
Avatar
2,806 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia
     
Apr 11, 2013 06:45 |  #13

Just use the lens hood. If it's anything like the other great white tele's, it's sturdy as f*** :lol:


Tumblr (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Youtube (external link)
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agedbriar
Goldmember
Avatar
2,576 posts
Likes: 309
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Slovenia
     
Apr 11, 2013 07:24 |  #14

Filter, absolutely.

Too many sticky particles airborne that require frequent cleaning of the front surface - whatever it is.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nellyle
Goldmember
Avatar
1,228 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 281
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
     
Apr 11, 2013 07:30 |  #15

agedbriar wrote in post #15815213 (external link)
Filter, absolutely.

Too many sticky particles airborne that require frequent cleaning of the front surface - whatever it is.

Surely then, you'd have to clean the filter eventually, what's the difference? It's not hard to clean a front element.


5D3, 7D2, 1D3, 40D, 14 f2.8 Samyang, 17-40 L, 28-80 L, 70-200 2.8ii L, 200 2.8ii L, 200-400 L, 1.4 ii,
http://chris-stamp.smugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,108 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 300 f4 Should I put a filter on it???
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is batman394
863 guests, 379 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.