Red-Ringed Tupperware Party with (super-effective) Tin Foil Hats (6)

Woolburr wrote in post #4629777
The 16-35mm original uses 77mm filters.

really? That's a relief because honestly I THOUGHT it was 77 at the time I bought it...I just must have been looking at version one. At least I'm just a poor researcher rather than losing my mind. Small consolation I know but still....

Yes, original Mk1 is 77mm.

Did you get the Mk1? If you did, it's all good.

It's OK. We all make mistakes when reading from time to time.

no, mk2 and it says 82 on the front. I was so surprised when I went to put my 77mm on it and it didn't fit.

I'm looking for business cards at the moment...I was something nice, personalized and economical. It's hard to find.

Ouch. Sorry to hear that

If it makes you feel better, nobody can plan for everything. I make key purchasing decisions for computing equipment and *EVERY* time I think there is something I could have done better or had overlooked

ah it's all right. Really I just wasn't prepared. And the least expensive brand (hoya) is $100 for that size...that just shocked me! Sooo...I did something I thought I'd never do, bought one off of ebay If it's garbage okay....it didn't cost much. And if it's fine, then great

Which Hoya did you get? They make some very good stuff. If you got a Pro1 or Super HMC/S-HMC you are going to be just fine.

The shots of the Great Ocean Road I did - the ones you really liked, those were shot with a Hoya Pro1 UV low profile in front of my 10-22. Honestly can't see a difference between a bare lens or my Schneider Optics B+W MRC filters (supposedly some of the very finest that you can get)

Most of my high end filters are B+W MRC, but I use some Hoya HMC and Pro1's on some lenses because they are already there and I can't tell a difference. Center sharpness on my 17-85 from 28mm-85mm, seen through a Hoya HMC, looks just like my 24-105, 724ISL, etc.etc.

I've also been staring at the world through Hoya's high end prescription optics for the last 5+ years.. and the world looks just fine (although the world is messed up in its own way)

Permagrin wrote in post #4629811
no, mk2 and it says 82 on the front. I was so surprised when I went to put my 77mm on it and it didn't fit.

I think everyone has gone through that with the 16-35L II. In my case, I have to use thin filters on the 1Ds. That's when things really start to get expensive, especially on polarizers.

Permagrin wrote in post #4629832
ah it's all right. Really I just wasn't prepared. And the least expensive brand (hoya) is $100 for that size...that just shocked me! Sooo...I did something I thought I'd never do, bought one off of ebay If it's garbage okay....it didn't cost much. And if it's fine, then great

2filter.com (Where I buy all my filters) has a S-HMC 82mm for 51 dollars....

belmondo wrote in post #4629398
That was definitely an adventure. We're still seeing the occasional repercussion, but things are much improved.

I think so too, but what do I know?

Permagrin wrote in post #4629544
Mooooorning everyone

just an FYI, I am feeling much better today.


Yes you are right, I looked again and they look very similar but the knobs are different and there is no black line at the top. If it works that's all I care about.

oh and if the shower question was a general inquiry...why yes, I did.

The shower question was originally for Chris, but thanks for caring, er um I mean sharing.

belmondo wrote in post #4629875
I think everyone has gone through that with the 16-35L II. In my case, I have to use thin filters on the 1Ds. That's when things really start to get expensive, especially on polarizers.

Stupid question. But why is it different from your other camera bodies ?

In2Photos wrote in post #4629881
I think so too, but what do I know?

The shower question was originally for Chris, but thanks for caring, er um I mean sharing.

What?! I missed that. You want to know about my showering habits.

Creepy, dood. Creepy.

tommykjensen wrote in post #4629890
Stupid question. But why is it different from your other camera bodies ?

I was wondering the same thing.

I needed the thin one on the 10-22 due to vignetting, but I've never heard of that need for bodies.

tommykjensen wrote in post #4629890
Stupid question. But why is it different from your other camera bodies ?

Full frame. Increased risk of vignetting.

That said, I'm a 5D/17-40 user with regular thickness (5mm) B+W MRC polarizer and no problems. I even use the Cokin P system on it with no problems.

tommykjensen wrote in post #4629890
Stupid question. But why is it different from your other camera bodies ?

FF, so 16mm with a full thickness filter can cause vignetting. Similar to a 10-22mm on a 1.6x body. That said, it doesn't always happen.