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 02 Jul 2018 (Monday) 17:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Anybody ever stepped down a 77mm filter to an 82mm thread?

 
geneva14456
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2017
Location: Canandaigua, NY
     
Jul 02, 2018 17:47 |  #1

Hi all-

I'm pretty heavily invested in 77mm filters, because my Tokina was my widest thread at 77mm. I use step-up adapter rings to use them on my other lenses that range from 49mm to 67mm, and that works okay as long as I keep those filters clean and well out of focal range. (I have a CPL and an assortment of NDs, and use them for landscape photography only.) I've just upgraded from a 60D to a 6D and needed to replace that equally terrible yet versatile 18-135mm EF-S kit lens. Of course, all the standard zooms for FF are threaded for 82mm filters. I went with the Sigma 24-105mm art, which won't be arriving for about a week, so no, I can't do tests with it because I don't have the lens in hand and I don't have (not yet, anyway) an 82mm-77mm step-down ring...

I've read all the other topics I could find on the subject, and sure, yeah, of course I'll get vignetting if I put the 77mm ND on the 82mm Sigma -- and it'll be worse at wider angles. I wouldn't be surprised if I got much worse than a bit of vignetting, like total darkness, leprechauns or any such thing at the periphery. I get that. So here's my question:

Is the *amount* of peripheral damage I'd experience using a 77mm filter with a step-down ring on the 82mm Sigma be "small" enough such that I could compensate for it by shooting a little wider and simply cropping in post? Or if shooting any wider simply widens the problematic part of my image, then I'm just stuck with the crop in post to remove the ugly bits?

If any of you gear heads have an example image that you could post here using any stepped-down 77mm filter on any of the 82mm dia. FF standard zooms (24-70mm, 24-105mm), shot at 24mm, that would be very interesting to see. Obviously, I'm struggling with the idea of whether to buy an inexpensive step-down ring or invest a lot of money on all new filters -- especially now that my standard zoom, which used to be my softest lens, will soon be the sharpest lens in my bag. Note: My wife, who likes my photos just fine already, is less than pleased about the cost of the FF upgrade. Adding filters to the damage done could prove problematic. A common problem with photography, in my experience...

Thanks,
Doug




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,326 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2076
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Jul 02, 2018 18:21 |  #2

Even just placing a correctly sized filter on a lens can cause additional vignetting, reducing the size will definitely cause more, probably even going all black at the far corners.

I wouldn't even try.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,326 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2076
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Jul 02, 2018 18:22 |  #3

Ugh, I skipped the part where it was a zoom. If you are at the long end of the lens you will be less likely to have a problem.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
geneva14456
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2017
Location: Canandaigua, NY
     
Jul 02, 2018 20:16 as a reply to  @ Left Handed Brisket's post |  #4

Thanks, LHB!

Like I wrote in my original post, I said that I was *expecting* vignetting or dark spots at the very least. My question, to be clear, was how much, and whether I could still take some photos and crop out the bad bits without losing too much of it.

Doug




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,326 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2076
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Jul 02, 2018 21:15 |  #5

Every lens, step down ring, and filter will yield different results. Even aperture, and as said focal length, will change the results. Maybe someone will come along who has done it with this exact combination, because any other answer would be speculation.

I understand the position you are in with the Mrs., but it would be a shame to have just bought into FF and then have to crop to get rid of the almost guaranteed heavy vignette when shooting wide.

Good luck.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
624 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 303
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
     
Jul 03, 2018 00:56 |  #6

I agree with what LHB has said. The effect depends on the focal length, aperture, and filter construction, and if you can’t get the full FOV from your 24-105 below about 29mm, you have a wider field with your 60D/18-135 at 18mm (although you still have other advantages with the 6D and 24-105 Art).

On the other hand, I can definitely relate to the financial concerns of She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed, and you just spent a bundle on the 6D plus 24-105.

Rather than look at it as all-or-nothing, why not start with the 82-77 step down ring, which should cost less than $10. Then you can decide if that is acceptable, but start with that and over time, you can gradually replace your filters as your budget allows and for things like holidays and birthdays (yours, not hers ;-)a).

Mike


Canon EOS 7D Mark II, EOS M5, and EOS 100 (film SLR)
A bunch of Canon lenses and a couple of Sigmas
A backpack, a bicycle, and a pair of hiking boots

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yellowt2
Senior Member
259 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jul 03, 2018 15:52 |  #7

geneva14456 wrote in post #18655285 (external link)
Of course, all the standard zooms for FF are threaded for 82mm filters. I went with the Sigma 24-105mm art

A little late now that you've bought a lens, but it's not true that all standard zooms for FF are 82mm.

The following Canon lenses all use 77mm filters:
24-70 f/2.8L
24-70 f/4L IS
24-105 f/4L IS
24-105 f/4L IS II
24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

If you rely on filters a lot it might have been worth looking at one of those instead of the Sigma

If you really like the Sigma and want to stick with it, you might be OK. Looking at a few reviews of 82-77mm step down rings, one person said "works great with my sigma 24-105 lens" without specifying whether there was any vignetting or not; other people successfully used them on the Canon 24-70 and Tokina 24-70 zooms. If I were you I would just try it when the lens arrives and see for yourself what it looks like.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ from ­ PA
Cream of the Crop
8,614 posts
Likes: 646
Joined May 2003
Location: Southeast Pennsylvania
     
Jul 03, 2018 16:09 |  #8

geneva14456 wrote in post #18655358 (external link)
Thanks, LHB!

Like I wrote in my original post, I said that I was *expecting* vignetting or dark spots at the very least. My question, to be clear, was how much, and whether I could still take some photos and crop out the bad bits without losing too much of it.

Doug

When you get the new lens simply test it by holding the 77mm in front and firing a shot. Do it full long at f/11 and wide open; then full wide, again at f/11 and wide open. Then make your judgement. The Sigma is a nice piece of glass, but I suspect you are crippling it at the places where it shines.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yellowt2
Senior Member
259 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jul 03, 2018 16:15 |  #9

I did a quick google for you and found someone who said:
"I use 77mm filters with Sigma 24-105 with a step down ring, I see don't any vignette beyond 26 mm."




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
geneva14456
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2017
Location: Canandaigua, NY
     
Jul 04, 2018 14:38 as a reply to  @ John from PA's post |  #10

Thanks, John.

I've got the curse of being an engineer/physicist, so not being able to hold it at the *exact* same position that the step-down ring would doesn't help me determine all that much. At least not with the confidence I require. Bad genes, man.

Doug




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
geneva14456
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2017
Location: Canandaigua, NY
     
Jul 04, 2018 15:09 as a reply to  @ yellowt2's post |  #11

Thanks, Yellowt2!

Oops on that extensive list of Canon 24's with 77mm threads. I didn't look *that* closely at the Canon lenses due to cost and the price-to-performance ratio. The ones I looked at were superior to the field in sharpness throughout the range, but I thought they fell short in other areas. (The real world is no laboratory, is it?) I finally decided to go with one of the less expensive (and less-capable) Tokina and *earlier* versions of the Sigma and Tamron 24-70mms. But then I had to toss the Sigma DG out of play for CA problems, and when it came down to it, I couldn't find (used) the others for enough less than the 24-105mm Art to feel any good about saving fifty to a hundred bucks. I got an amazing price on a crispy Art lens, and while giving up the f/2.8 on the 24-70s, I'm getting some decent image stabilization with the f/4, great glass and a longer range for when I can't carry my bag.

Thanks for Googling for me. I searched but didn't find anything. I don't know why it didn't occur to me to peek at reviews for the step-down filter. That's brilliant. I'm *encouraged* by what the guy/girl you quoted wrote, but like others have pointed out, the focal length is only one part of the equation. I'm reaching out to a few friends to see if they've got what I need lying around. For free. Next stop, Amazon. I'm certainly going to try the step-down before re-investing in new filters, but I could, y'know, sell my 77mms to offset the cost -- to my marriage -- and simply step-up to 82mm on my other lenses. It'd look like a lens hood on my night-fifty. :-)

Doug




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ from ­ PA
Cream of the Crop
8,614 posts
Likes: 646
Joined May 2003
Location: Southeast Pennsylvania
     
Jul 04, 2018 15:57 |  #12

geneva14456 wrote in post #18656347 (external link)
Thanks, John.

I've got the curse of being an engineer/physicist, so not being able to hold it at the *exact* same position that the step-down ring would doesn't help me determine all that much. At least not with the confidence I require. Bad genes, man.

Doug

A cheap ring is only $6.50 with shipping. See https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …_77mm_Step_Down​_Ring.html (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
geneva14456
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2017
Location: Canandaigua, NY
     
Jul 04, 2018 18:23 as a reply to  @ John from PA's post |  #13

Thanks, John!

The reviews for that "cheap" filter ring were excellent and encouraging! It's on order!

I'll report back when I have results -- maybe post a photo...

Case closed. Thank you all for your help!

Doug




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yellowt2
Senior Member
259 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jul 06, 2018 18:00 |  #14

geneva14456 wrote in post #18656365 (external link)
Thanks, Yellowt2!

Oops on that extensive list of Canon 24's with 77mm threads. I didn't look *that* closely at the Canon lenses due to cost and the price-to-performance ratio. The ones I looked at were superior to the field in sharpness throughout the range, but I thought they fell short in other areas. (The real world is no laboratory, is it?) I finally decided to go with one of the less expensive (and less-capable) Tokina and *earlier* versions of the Sigma and Tamron 24-70mms. But then I had to toss the Sigma DG out of play for CA problems, and when it came down to it, I couldn't find (used) the others for enough less than the 24-105mm Art to feel any good about saving fifty to a hundred bucks. I got an amazing price on a crispy Art lens, and while giving up the f/2.8 on the 24-70s, I'm getting some decent image stabilization with the f/4, great glass and a longer range for when I can't carry my bag.

I definitely understand; I would also pick the lens I want first and then worry about other things like filters :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,005 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 373
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Jul 08, 2018 21:31 |  #15

sounds like a pretty half-ass solution to me like the guys recommending using ef-s lenses on FF but limiting yourself to a certain range. a sure recipe for disaster when you're in the heat of the moment...if that matters to you.


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

1,111 views & 7 likes for this thread
Anybody ever stepped down a 77mm filter to an 82mm thread?
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 olbez
1059 guests, 364 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

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.