Filter Recommendation - Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L

travischance

I don't normally attach filters to my lenses as I rely heavily upon the hoods for protection. However I recently purchased a 16-35 f/2.8L and with the lens design, filter size (82) and small hood, I plan on attaching some type of filter.

What do you recommend? Neutral Density or Circular Polarizer. Unfortunately, the 82mm isn't shareable with my 24-105 f/4L (77) and my 100-400 f/4L (77). Considering that this filter size will be expensive, I'll only have one....

Thanks...

ChatKat

Filter
I always buy a UV filter. The Canon or Hoya are fine. I saw a haze filter for $46 at B&H that would work as a protrective filter for the front element. I got a scratch on a lrense because it was taken off.

TomCollins

uncletrav wrote:

I don't normally attach filters to my lenses as I rely heavily upon the hoods for protection. However I recently purchased a 16-35 f/2.8L and with the lens design, filter size (82) and small hood, I plan on attaching some type of filter.

What do you recommend? Neutral Density or Circular Polarizer. Unfortunately, the 82mm isn't shareable with my 24-105 f/4L (77) and my 100-400 f/4L (77). Considering that this filter size will be expensive, I'll only have one....

Thanks...

Much depends on what you're trying to do. If you're looking for something to protect the glass on the end of that really nice lens, then all you need is a UV filter. A polarizer and neutral density filter offer two entirely different results in the photo's you'll be taking with one or the other on the lens. Of the type you're thinking of, you will be screwing them directly onto the lens. If you happen to be using a circular polarizer and you have the lens hood on, it can be a little difficult to turn the filter to achieve the desired result. Some of these filters can be really expensive and all of them offer different results. You might want to spend a little time reading up on the different filter types including the advantages of round vs square. Here's a link that might help explain things. http://www.tiffen.com/camera_filters.htm I've just recently started using filters and now find them indespensable for landscape photography and have decided to go, primarily with the square type. Good luck.
Tom

Toshido

from http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Unfortunately, a normal thickness UV filter causes some additional vignetting at 16mm when mounted on a full frame body. This can be seen using the mouseover feature in the lens vignetting comparison. So, the B+W 82mm MRC Slim UV Filter is going to be the best full frame option in my opinion. Users of 1.3x and 1.6x crop bodies will be fine with the normal thickness B+W 82mm MRC UV Filter. "

looks like a slim filter is likely best, depending on your camera of course.

travischance

Toshido wrote:

from http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx




looks like a slim filter is likely best, depending on your camera of course.

I think that a CPL will probably work best (during daytime photos) but on those long exposures, the ND will most likely be the best bet. Of the few long exposures I've taken during the day, all photos were blown out. What I'm really looking for, is of these two which one is the best combination? A MCUV would only protect the glass. I realize I'll can achieve more vivid blue skies with the CPL and better contrast and "non-blown out" photos using the ND (especially on bright days and long exp). Since I'm going the B+W route, I'm only going to purchase one. Thanks....

ziggy53

uncletrav wrote:

I think that a CPL will probably work best (during daytime photos) but on those long exposures, the ND will most likely be the best bet. Of the few long exposures I've taken during the day, all photos were blown out. What I'm really looking for, is of these two which one is the best combination? A MCUV would only protect the glass. I realize I'll can achieve more vivid blue skies with the CPL and better contrast and "non-blown out" photos using the ND (especially on bright days and long exp). Since I'm going the B+W route, I'm only going to purchase one. Thanks....

A neutral density (ND) filter is what you want for a long exposure daylight image. (Waterfalls, rivers, waves, etc.)

For a great water blur effect try a 10 stop ND filter.

littlesaint

Depending on how much light blockage you need, a CPL can double as an ND. I get about 2 stops with my B&W CPL. The thing to be careful about with a CPL is you have to know how to use it. Angle of the sun, your relationship to the sun, and what you are photographing, all play into how you set/turn the CPL, or even whether you should use it at all.

ziggy53

Littlesaint, welcome to the Digital Grin.

Thanks for the comment.