Hi,
On my Canon 17-55 2.8 (77mm) lens, will a 84x120mm GND filter be sufficient or is a 100x150 mm needed for enough movement latitude?
I'm looking at buying Singh-Ray ND and GND (.6) filters.
Thanks for any experienced advice.
trailguy Senior Member More info | Jan 30, 2012 12:31 | #1 Hi,
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Russ61 Senior Member 265 posts Likes: 2 Joined Aug 2009 Location: Tacoma, WA area More info | Jan 30, 2012 16:40 | #2 I have a 10-22mm and 100-400mm lens, both requiring 77mm filters. Atop the CPL's typically used I'll handhold Hitech P sized (85 x 110mm) GNDs. Laterally I do have to be somewhat careful to ensure that the edge of the GND doesn't encroach into the frame. Normally the positioning of the transition zone is such that the height is rarely, if ever, a problem, ie so high or low that the opposite end encroaches into the frame. That said, a larger GND would give you more latitude....but typically at 2x the cost and bulkier as well. Your call!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
KoalaCowboy Goldmember More info | Jan 30, 2012 16:42 | #3 trailguy, - -
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jon Cream of the Crop 69,628 posts Likes: 227 Joined Jun 2004 Location: Bethesda, MD USA More info | Jan 30, 2012 16:51 | #4 On the 17-55, the 84 mm (Cokin P size) with the Cokin WA holder would just about suffice. But if you think you might go wider down the road, I'd get the 100 mm filters and start looking for the Lee holders and WA adapter ring. Cost you less in the long run than having to start over with the bigger filters after having started with the smaller ones.. Jon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Thanks for the advice. I'm wanting to buy some Singh-Ray (not screw in) .6 filters. My 'larger' lens, Canon 70-200 L IS is, I think (without going and looking) actually smaller diameter than the 17-55 lens. So, I suppose the 84x120 would work.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jon Cream of the Crop 69,628 posts Likes: 227 Joined Jun 2004 Location: Bethesda, MD USA More info | Jan 30, 2012 19:07 | #6 If it's the f/4 it's not a 77 mm. But it's the lens' angle of view that matters more than the filter diameter. If you were to go to the 10-22, or FF with a 16-35, you'd want the 100 mm filters. Lee filter holders are 100 mm wide; Cokin P are 84. So there's less likely to be vignetting with the Lee. And hand-holding the filter is fine if the camera's on a tripod, but some times you need to hand-hold the camera, so using a filter holder means getting the shot. Jon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Which (Lee or Cokin) would fit it closer to the lens? I belive closer is better?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is Niagara Wedding Photographer 1240 guests, 148 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||