Do you think canon is releasing new version of EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM?

[HDNitehawk]

Congrats Brant, it is an awesome lens.

I quit buying expensive filters, although I still have a large collection. When I am using the camera I take the filters off and put them back on afterwards. The only pictures I have the filters on anymore are the ones taken very quickly.

I know you asked John but I would prefer the XS-Pro with MRC-Nano rather than the F-Pro.

[Kayaker72]

Congrats Brant, it is an awesome lens.

I quit buying expensive filters, although I still have a large collection. When I am using the camera I take the filters off and put them back on afterwards. The only pictures I have the filters on anymore are the ones taken very quickly.

I know you asked John but I would prefer the XS-Pro with MRC-Nano rather than the F-Pro.

Thanks Rick (EDIT-and Steve!)...I've been debating whether I even need to upgrade anything for awhile. I've been looking at some prime lenses, the 70-200 II, the 24-70 II, etc. Then this happened and along came my answer.....

I should have made it an open question. I do have one MRC-Nano filter and it does seem to stay a little cleaner than my MRC filters. At least, I don't recall having to clean it as often. I had thought this was just my perception, but I've recently read other people making similar claims (so it must be true).

Why are you taking your filters off? This is an open question. A post caught my attention the other day where I saw that Jonathan Huyer takes his filters off for night scape photography. I'll be posting a few photos I took this weekend of "Water Fire" in Providence, RI. I have several shots I like, but I am noticing a slight halo around the fire. Is that the type of effect you are trying to avoid by removing your filter?

[HDNitehawk]

Thanks Rick (EDIT-and Steve!)...I've been debating whether I even need to upgrade anything for awhile. I've been looking at some prime lenses, the 70-200 II, the 24-70 II, etc. Then this happened and along came my answer.....

I should have made it an open question. I do have one MRC-Nano filter and it does seem to stay a little cleaner than my MRC filters. At least, I don't recall having to clean it as often. I had thought this was just my perception, but I've recently read other people making similar claims (so it must be true).

Why are you taking your filters off? This is an open question. A post caught my attention the other day where I saw that Jonathan Huyer takes his filters off for night scape photography. I'll be posting a few photos I took this weekend of "Water Fire" in Providence, RI. I have several shots I like, but I am noticing a slight halo around the fire. Is that the type of effect you are trying to avoid by removing your filter?

I prefer the MRC-Nano because I have both versions and I think the MRC-Nano versions give a bit better IQ. Both are good filters.

I take the filters off because of the small improvement in IQ. Any glass you put in front of your lens will degrade the image, even if it is slight. This is true of any filter you use no matter how much you spend or how great it is.

I have had a DSLR now for five years. I know the reasons to have the filters to protect the lens, it keeps it clean and it helps with weather sealing. If I look back only once did I drop a lens and then filter didn't matter. I seldom take pictures when it is raining or I am in a dirt storm. So overall the protection the filters provide is minimal, at least for me. The big selling point for me is that my most prized lenses, the supertele's have no filter at all. They run naked and I have never had a problem.

So now I leave both the threaded filter and the lens cap on. I just unscrew the filter drop it in my pocket and go. If it is raining or I am in a dusty place I might leave it on. If I have an accident with a lens, that is why I pay for a gold CPS membership.

If I looked at it as insurance to protect my lens and compared to the cost versus the value over 5 years for repairs I have done no repairs that the filter would have protected or stopped. I have spent well over $1000 for filters, as insurance goes they do not pay off.

[Steve U]

They run naked and I have never had a problem.

Very progressive of you.

[ahab1372]

Congrats Brant, it is an awesome lens.

I quit buying expensive filters, although I still have a large collection. When I am using the camera I take the filters off and put them back on afterwards. The only pictures I have the filters on anymore are the ones taken very quickly.

I know you asked John but I would prefer the XS-Pro with MRC-Nano rather than the F-Pro.

XS-Pro vs F-Pro is just the thickness of the filter ring, both should ( or could be) available in MRC Nano. Using XS-Pro filters allows for more stacked filters (for example if I'm too lazy to take of the clear filter before I add a ND or CPL, or if I want to combine CPL and ND). If you think it is unlikely that you stack certain types of filters, or if the lens is not prone to additional vignetting with stacked filters, you might as well choose the F-Pro version. Might be slightly easier to handle as well.

[HDNitehawk]

F-Pro vs F-Pro is just the thickness of the filter ring, both should ( or could be) available in MRC Nano. Using X-pro filters allows for more stacked filters (for example if I'm too lazy to take of the clear filter before I add a ND or CPL, or if I want to combine CPL and ND). If you think it is unlikely that you stack certain types of filters, or if the lens is not prone to additional vignetting with stacked filters, you might as well choose the F-Pro version. Might be slightly easier to handle as well.

A quick check on B&H for a 82mm filter the MRC Nano was only available on the XS-Pro. The $79 filter Brant mentioned had only the MRC coating.
Possibly they would be available somewhere else.

[ahab1372]

You are right, it is not always obvious if a filter in a certain configuration is just not available at the seller, or not at all. I did not find the B+W website to be helpful at all the last time I checked.
Adorama does not have the F-Pro Nano either.