Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM

David Arbogast wrote in post #17765728
a7R II:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/zuCZ​6o
A Foggy Spooktacle by David Arbogast, on Flickr

Really cool shot David!

vwjoe76 wrote in post #17765886
Great seasonal photo! I like the hues of blue coming from behind the house.

cutwater wrote in post #17766119
Great Halloween spirit shot!

idsurfer wrote in post #17766303
Really cool shot David!

Thanks much for the nice replies!

Plitvicka Jezera, Croatia

Beautiful shot. And beautiful country. I hope to go back and spend a lot more time there.

Canon EOS 5D MkIII + EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM @30mm f/11

Canon EOS 5D MkIII + EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM @24mm f/16

I need to buy the 77mm adapter ring for my Lee Filter kit...does the standard 77mm work OK on this lens, or do I have to pay double for the wide-angle version? Is there a cheaper alternative? Crazy that the wide angle version is $70!

David Arbogast wrote in post #17770949
I need to buy the 77mm adapter ring for my Lee Filter kit...does the standard 77mm work OK on this lens, or do I have to pay double for the wide-angle version? Is there a cheaper alternative? Crazy that the wide angle version is $70!

I use the WA version. I think the standard version works fine for the most part, but the WA version is meant to reduce vignetting at the extreme wide FLs (16-18 probably).
UWA lenses vignette badly as it is, when you add that filter holder, it tends to increase the vignetting.
I believe the WA ring is meant to be thinner and less "in the way" of the light.

Having said that, vignette is correctible in post, so ymmv.

David Arbogast wrote in post #17770949
I need to buy the 77mm adapter ring for my Lee Filter kit...does the standard 77mm work OK on this lens, or do I have to pay double for the wide-angle version? Is there a cheaper alternative? Crazy that the wide angle version is $70!

David, I would buy the WA version if I was you. I have an 82mm WA for my tse which I use on this lens with a step up ring and that shades ever so slightly I feel. I haven't tried the 77mm standard to be sure but I feel it would be the same as the step up ring hardly adds any depth at all. I dont know for sure though

Puckman wrote in post #17770957
I use the WA version. I think the standard version works fine for the most part, but the WA version is meant to reduce vignetting at the extreme wide FLs (16-18 probably).
UWA lenses vignette badly as it is, when you add that filter holder, it tends to increase the vignetting.
I believe the WA ring is meant to be thinner and less "in the way" of the light.

Having said that, vignette is correctible in post, so ymmv.

xpfloyd wrote in post #17770971
David, I would buy the WA version if I was you. I have an 82mm WA for my tse which I use on this lens with a step up ring and that shades ever so slightly I feel. I haven't tried the 77mm standard to be sure but I feel it would be the same as the step up ring hardly adds any depth at all. I dont know for sure though

Thanks for the answers! Really wish there was a more cost-reasonable answer.

David Arbogast wrote in post #17771080
Thanks for the answers! Really wish there was a more cost-reasonable answer.

I think there was some talk about an eBay clone of the wide angle adapter recently in one on the ND threads...

Pretty sure it was about the filter dude

http://www.thefilterdu​de.com/wide-angle-adapter-ring/

JohnPh wrote in post #17771218
Pretty sure it was about the filter dude

http://www.thefilterdu​de.com/wide-angle-adapter-ring/

Thanks John, that rings a bell

No problem. I wish I'd known about him before, the prices for Lee WA filter adapters are a bit steep!

+1 for TheFilterDude. I have a Lee-branded WA77mm and a FilterDude-branded WA82mm and the difference is minimal at best. It's definitely a piece where you can save a few bucks for the same performance.