Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

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

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,900
    Quote Originally Posted by ahab1372 View Post
    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.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    Posts
    694
    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.
    Last edited by ahab1372; 10-17-2013 at 01:32 AM.
    Arnt

  3. #23
    Senior Member neuroanatomist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    3,716
    I got the XS-Pro Nano, not knowing about the lack of vignetting with the thicker F-Pro mount. Although I don't notice any IQ difference between the MRC and Nano filters, the latter are easier to clean, reason enough to get them, IMO (but not reason enough to replace existing filters, which are still plenty easy to clean). I'd get the XS-Pro again today. The issue Roger mentions, he was clear that it's rare and only with cheap/knock-off slim filters - B+W and other reputable brands have no issues.

    I haven't noticed any IQ degradation with a filter, the exception is with a strong backlight certain lenses flare badly, taking a big contrast hit (70-200/2.8L IS II, I'm looking at you...or through you, as the case may be). The filter is easier to clean than a front element, and I worry less about doing so, even if a front element replacement costs only a little more than one of those expensive filters, a DIY 'fix' doesn't get much easier than a few keystrokes and trackpad taps.

    While it's true that the superteles don't have a front filter, they have one internally - and Canon says to leave a filter or the gelatin holder (which is optical glass) in place. More importantly, from a protection standpoint I really don't think it's a valid argument to compare the protection offered by the 1.65" shallow petal hood of my 24-70/2.8L II with the 8" deep hood of my 600/4L IS II, which is big enough to hold a pair of 24-70/2.8L II *lenses*, fully extended with room to spare. My 24-70 II's business end gets touched by the kids, brushed with leaves as I walk with the camera on the BR strap or SpiderPro holster, etc. Last week on a hike, the notch of the petal hood 'helpfully' guided a branch right onto the front of the lens. The Nano filter was unharmed, and I don't know that I'd be saying that about a bare front element.

  4. #24
    Senior Member neuroanatomist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    3,716
    Ps. Congrats on the lens, Brant. It's a FF camera's best friend!

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,900
    In case someone is wondering about the difference in the XS and F designation;

    http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/faq/bw.htm#qu26
    26. What are the differences between the various B+W filter mounts?
    F-Pro: Compared to the earlier standard mount introduced in 2001, the F-Pro mount has become thinner. Now it can be used with wide angle lenses, including most 24mm focal lengths on a full frame body, without vignetting. Another advantage of the F-Pro mount is it's modified retaining ring, which is no longer threaded in from the front, but holds the filter glass in place from the back. When removing a filter or lens hood that has been screwed on too tight to the filter, the retaining ring is not at risk of loosening. Diopters are mounted in the older mount due to glass thickness.
    XS-Pro Digital: This mount is especially suited for DSLRs with wide angle lenses. This mount will avoid vignetting with most 17mm lenses on a full frame body. Some report success with lenses as wide as 16mm. It has a front thread for additional accessories such as lens caps or hoods. All XS-Pro Digital mounts are made of brass and are matte black to prevent reflections. Only UV, Clear, and Käsemann Circular Polarizers are offered in this mount, with the latest MRC nano coating. ALWAYS SHOOT A TEST TO CONFIRM WITH YOUR EQUIPMENT.
    Multi-Resistant Coating (MRC) with Nano Technology
    The nano coating is an outer layer of protection that comes standard with all XS-Pro Digital MRC filters. The nanotechnology based characteristic (lotus effect) produces a better beading effect with water making the cleaning of this filter even simpler and faster than ever before. MRC nano has an improved outer (8th) layer over regular MRC.

    Slim-Line: This mount is for wide angle lenses. They do not have a front accessory thread to avoid vignetting with lenses as wide as 17mm in 35mm format. Some report success with lenses as wide as 16mm. A slip on cap is supplied with Slim filters, sizes 49mm through 82mm. ALWAYS SHOOT A TEST TO CONFIRM WITH YOUR EQUIPMENT.
    Extra-Wide: The diameter of the front portion of an EW "oversized" filter mount is much larger than the male thread that is screwed into the lens. As a result, the corresponding filter glass is also larger. When mounted to a wide angle lens with an angle of view of 110 degrees or even 120 degrees, vignetting is not an issue. Available in 62mm thru 110mm, EW filters should be used without a lens hood as vignetting may occur.
    Digital-Pro: The term "Digital-Pro" refers to the use of a brushed chrome ring as opposed to the standard black ring. There is no optical difference when comparing similar glass types. Digital-Pro filters may be used with both film and digital cameras.
    HSB: Various lenses for Hasselblad cameras are equipped with bayonets for the attachment of filters and lens hoods. The advantage of a bayonet mount over threaded filters is quick attachment and removal. All HSB mounts are discontinued.
    Series: Filter glass, in mounts without threads, are placed into special holders and are held in place with a retaining ring or lens hood. Available in series 7, 8, 9. Series 93 (9a) for Hasselblad is discontinued.
    Drop-In: This mount is for use with the Schneider 28PC shift lens. 74mm Drop-In filters require the use of the 67EW drop-in filter holder with lens hood (65-060013).
    Bayonet: Bay 1 is for Rollei and Yashica twin lens cameras. Bay 2, 3, and 6 are for Rollei twin lens cameras. Lens position prohibits placing a filter on the viewing and taking lenses at the same time. Rollei and Yashica Bayonet mounts 1,2 and 3, are discontinued.
    Here is a quick guide to the thicknesses of the different mounts:

    Mount Name
    Mount Color
    Non-Polarizers
    Polarizers
    F-Pro (front threads)
    Black
    5mm
    7mm
    Digital-Pro (front threads)
    Brushed Chrome
    5mm
    7mm
    Slim-Line (no front threads)
    Black
    3mm
    *5mm
    XS-Pro Digital (front threads)
    Black
    3mm
    4mm
    Extra-Wide (front threads)
    Black
    Call
    Call
    *All B+W Filter mounts are made of brass except the Slim-Line Circular Polarizer mounts which are made of aluminum for manufacturing reasons.
    Additionally, please refer to the following PDF for more info. For XS Pro Digital information

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,900
    It is true that in most situations you will never notice a drop in IQ with a good B+W filter. There are certain situations where I have noticed the difference and most of the time it is when I am doing Macro, Landscapes and some Wildlife. Pixel Peeping is required and it is one of my bad habits.

    A thing to consider would be how you handle your equipment. John mentioned getting brushed with leaves when he is carrying it on a BR strap. If I put the lens at my side the cap and filter are back on. If a person likes to walk with the camera at ready like this I think a filter would be a good idea.

    I think that the front element of lenses is a bit tougher than we give them credit. I know I am over cautious with my lenses. From what I have seen though I think the front element is tougher than the filter, if the filter doesn't get damaged in a hit I doubt the element would either.

    I have been doing it this way over a year now, all my lenses front elements still look brand new.
    Last edited by HDNitehawk; 10-17-2013 at 03:14 PM.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,156
    I felt that I noticed a drop in IQ with a B+W UV filter, so I took mine off and I keep it for harsh conditions (sailing trips, shoots in the rain, etc.). I think LensRentals did a comparison once between the cost of putting a filter on every lens vs. the cost of front element repairs; front element repairs were noticeably cheaper averaged out on a per-lens basis (they have a great sample size in this case). Then I read their blog post, http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011...th-bad-filters, and decided I'd leave those filters on the shelf except when I needed them for sealing purposes in harsh conditions. Just my $0.02 of course.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Central Kentucky
    Posts
    2,990
    Speaking of LensRentals look at the latest blog entry.....another argument for not using filters? http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013...th-bad-filters

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Joel Eade View Post
    Speaking of LensRentals look at the latest blog entry.....another argument for not using filters? http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013...th-bad-filters
    Roger must have taken lessons from Yahoo News. He gave us only half of the story. He had the problem with certain filters but he didn't name names. (at least I didn't see names)

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    Posts
    694
    Quote Originally Posted by Joel Eade View Post
    Speaking of LensRentals look at the latest blog entry.....another argument for not using filters? http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013...th-bad-filters
    for sure another argument for not using cheap filters
    Arnt

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •