77 mm step ring and filter on the 16-35 II?

The only filter I keep and use anymore is a 77mm polarizer. I recently purchased the 16-35 II and am hesitant to drop another $100+ on a second polarizing filter. Has anyone tried shooting at 16mm on a 5D2 with a 77mm filter and step ring? How bad is the vignetting?

Being that an 82mm CPL can show barely a bit of vignetting depending on its thickness, its almost certain that a step down filter from 82mm to 77mm will be A LOT. Welcome to owning the most expensive, top of the line wide angle. If you wanna play with the big boys, youre gonna have to step it up. When I got the 16-35 II, I went back and forth all over the place with options and to this day I still am, mostly due to that odd and overpriced 82mm filter size. I bit the bullet and bought a second B+W F-Pro KSM CPL in the 82mm size (tried both the slim and non slim and found the slim made no difference and stuck with the non-slim). That was $200. So now I own the 77mm AND the 82mm CPLs. Just comes with the territory. Wait till you start trying to look into a filter holder foundation system for GND filters and the such! It gets even more expensive!

I ended up buying an 82mm polarizer and getting a step down ring for the rest of my 77mm lenses.

I don't have that lens, but I think it's going to vignette.

Stepping up from a 67mm lens thread to a 77mm filter is fine
Stepping down from a 82mm lens thread to a 77mm filter is not good.

constrict wrote in post #10632769
I ended up buying an 82mm polarizer and getting a step down ring for the rest of my 77mm lenses.

Yea, thats another way to do it, but the reason I didnt go that route is because when the 82mm filter is mounted to the 77mm filter size lenses you cant use the lens hood on them. I didnt like that as I always shoot with my lens hoods. So for me there was really no other option.

I have the 16-35 II and have hesitated buying a CPL because I worried that with a 108° FOV the polarizing effect would vary across the frame. For those of you using a CPL with the 16-35 II is this something you have noticed ? How much of a problem is it ?
Cheers,
Roy

roywsmith wrote in post #10632998
I have the 16-35 II and have hesitated buying a CPL because I worried that with a 108° FOV the polarizing effect would vary across the frame. For those of you using a CPL with the 16-35 II is this something you have noticed ? How much of a problem is it ?
Cheers,
Roy

Oh it def does. Its not an even effect across an entire sky say for example. However, most UWA lenses are going to be that way to some degree, so its not something you can totally avoid. IMO its not deal breaking bad on the 16-35 II, and if you are like me and bought it for indoors use too for the f/2.8 its a small price to pay.

ben_r_ wrote in post #10632849
Yea, thats another way to do it, but the reason I didnt go that route is because when the 82mm filter is mounted to the 77mm filter size lenses you cant use the lens hood on them. I didnt like that as I always shoot with my lens hoods. So for me there was really no other option.

That's why you put the hood on first, then the step ring and 82mm filter...82mm filter works on my 24-70, 70-200 & 24 1.4 with hoods on.

Peacefield wrote in post #10632059
The only filter I keep and use anymore is a 77mm polarizer. I recently purchased the 16-35 II and am hesitant to drop another $100+ on a second polarizing filter. Has anyone tried shooting at 16mm on a 5D2 with a 77mm filter and step ring? How bad is the vignetting?

how often are you going to use a CPL filter on an UWA lens? for me, not often but i do own an 82mm CPL for when i need it.

ed rader

On a crop, you wouldn't notice 82-->77, but on a FF, yikes! May as well drop that additional $100, sell off your current CPL, and buy a step adapter to bring your other lens to 82mm

77 will be terrible. I have an 82mm UV filter thats not slim, and it vignettes. My 82mm Kaesemann slim CP is acceptable.