16-35 L II : filter and hood ?

[HDNitehawk]

Jon is correct, but you're muddying the waters a bit, Rick. [img]/emoticons/emotion-4.gif[/img]

I muddied the waters and you gave him four options [:P]


This was the one Bryan recommends, and believe it is the one I bought.


[View:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&A=RetrieveSku&IC=BWUVMCS82&Q=]





When I bought it I had read all the reviews about how normal size filters you would get vignetting on the sides. So rather than take a chance I went as thin as possible.


But if the 82mm XS-Pro UV 010 (MRC) is thin enough that there is no vignetting then I like your way John. The slip on cap is very annoying and just not good. If I used my 16-35mm more than once a year now I might go buy one.

[Jon Ruyle]

The slip on cap is very annoying and just not good. If I used my 16-35mm more than once a year now I might go buy one.

I'd just like to repeat that for the OP- if you were planing to use your lens more than once a year, you might buy a new filter rather than put up with the cap on the slim you already have.


I agree completely and do not recommend the slim if you can avoid it.. I own two and regret buying both. (I know, fool me twice....). It is okay for occasional use, but for a lens I plan to carry around more than once a year, I would put up with a little more vignetting rather than the slim. I don't mind that the cover looks lame, but it just keeps falling off.


For a 7D or a 1DIII, I wouldn't give the slim any consideration at all. I'd probably get the xs pro just to be safe, but if I could be sure the f-pro would cause no vignetting, I'd get that.

[neuroanatomist]

This was the one Bryan recommends, and believe it is the one I bought.

True - but Bryan made that recommendation in his review of the 16-35mm L II, and at the time he wrote that review (presumably in 2007 when the lens was released), the XS-Pro mount was not available (B+W introduced it in 2009).


I do not notice any vignetting with the XS-Pro mount on my 16-35 on the 5DII (that is, no additional vignetting - at 16mm on FF, the bare lens does have nearly 3 stops of vignetting).


Jon, in Bryan's review he does indicate that for 1.3x and 1.6x FOVCF bodies, a standard (F-Pro) B+W filter is fine. However, 82mm filters aren't cheap. What if the OP ends up with a FF camera down the line, and then needs a thinner mount to eliminate vignetting? So,Tabazan,I'd recommend the82mm XS-Pro UV filter (MRC and with the new Nano coating that offers improved light transmission). If you're sure you'll never use the lens on FF, you can save $50 and get the F-Pro version.

[Tabazan]

Thanks a lot.


The loss caused by the filter (thin or classic) is a real debate... I think I will go for a "classic" filter for everyday use, just for protection, and no filter at all for specific work (architecture) which usually is done under safer conditions.