Filters and Filter Systems

[Jmarmck]

Hello all,

I am new here so I am sorry if this topic is in the wrong board. Perhaps there is another thread covering this topic?

Filters:
I recently bought a 4x5 Calumet CC-401. I have a Schneider Symmar-S 5.6/180 with a 67mm diameter front end.
I also have a Schneider Symmar-S 5.6/180 with a 77mm diameter front end.

After reading on several different filtering methods and systems I have found that I have three choices. The first is to simply buy the filters I need in both a 67 mm and 77 mm. Add in the other digital and 35mm film gear I have and this becomes a very expensive proposition, far more than I paid for the camera and first lens. The question here is vignette. Is this an issue with these and other wider lenses.

The second option is to filter the back side of the lens. Still the same monetary issues. I am not sure about the vignette on this method. Some opinions and observations would be helpful.

Lastly, there are the systems. Lee is very expensive and they are not very clear on the holder and ring adapters. The 4x4 filters are not cheap and the ND's are worse. The same with B+W though they seem to be focused on the single threaded systems. Hi Tech, maybe but the same issues with Lee. Cokin is not an option as their filters do not seem to be of the best optical quality.

So I am confused to say the least. I am inclined to start with a simple collection of B&W filers for the 67mm and the 77mm, say Tiffin or B+W. What are the advantages/disadvantages of these methods and systems?

Thanks
Marty

[Bill_1856]

Put a 67-77mmm step-up adapter on your smaller lens, and you'll only need one size of filters.
I don't understand why you have TWO identical focal length lenses -- is it a misprint?
I only use a half-dozen different filters (A, G, K2, yellow-green, and Polarizing) multicoated B+W or Hoya, mostly bought used on ebay, but frankly it doesn't seem to make any difference from the 60 year-old Tiffins and Kodaks which I bought when a teenager.

[Mark Woods]

I use Series 8 or Series 9 Filters for all of my lenses. I have the rings to step up to the desired filter. I only have the two sets of filters now.

[Mark Stahlke]

I use 77mm filters and stepping rings to fit them to smaller lenses.

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

I used to use the rectangular Lee system for my 5 lenses for about 10 years. I have now switched to what has been proposed above, by Bill_1856, that is a combination of the largest size filter (72 mm in my case) plus a few step-up rings. This approach seems to exhibit less flare than I used to get with the Lee filter holder. Also, the individual filter quality can be higher (clarity, flatness, and multicoating). They also wear better, which makes a difference especially with shorter focal length lenses.

I've no experience of using behind-the-lens filters, but I've seen many comments from people I trust suggesting that they significantly impact optical properties of lenses, except those that have been designed to have a permanent, replacable, behind-the-lens (or in the centre) filter.

[Michael Graves]

Ditto. But I keep Series VI as well for the itty bitty lenses.

I use Series 8 or Series 9 Filters for all of my lenses. I have the rings to step up to the desired filter. I only have the two sets of filters now.

[Mark Woods]

There is no more or less optical loss by putting the filter behind the lens. Usually the problems that are mentioned are with cinema lenses where the BTL filter throws off the flange focal distance, thereby throwing off the focusing ring. I've put filter behind the lens, in the middle of the lens (on long lenses), and in front. Pretty much all the same except for the long lenses (this is for 35mm cinema not LF). Putting the filter BTL also can cut down on flare.

[John Olsen]

Cokin is not an option as their filters do not seem to be of the best optical quality.

I didn't know that Cokin filters were not good. I've been happy using their P007 in several sizes for infrared films. The versatility of the Cokin system is pretty attractive, so don't be too quick to drop them from consideration.

That said, I usually have a lens shade on anyway, so I frequently use filters that slide into the shade. That way, it's one filter for all lenses.
Good luck.

[Jmarmck]

Wow, thank you all very much. Some good food for thought.
Yes, I screwed up on that second lens. It is a 5.6/210, 77mm, a pretty thing but no multi-coating. I have yet to use it. In fact, it is not even on a lens board.
I like the idea of the 100m sizes but I am not sure if there is any advantage over the step-up. Either way I will have to deal with step-up rings. One is in a holder, the other is in a round metal frame. I think a 77mm filter on a Nikkor 52mm barrel would look rather comical. Hey, no vignette problems here! 25 years ago I worked at a photographic shop where they sold Cokin. Most of those filters were easily scratched and damage from abuse, plastic. I had a few but they did not survive over the years. That is the reason for the Cokin comment. I figure glass would be better. Though, anything will get damaged with abuse.

I was planning on some standard B&W contrast filters, RGBY, maybe an ND and a graduated ND. I don't think I will need much more than that.
Is multi-coating important with these?

Thanks to you all.

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

I like the idea of the 100m sizes but I am not sure if there is any advantage over the step-up. Either way I will have to deal with step-up rings.

Though I've mentioned a few of their disadvantages, above, they have pluses too. The choice of filters seems wider, and if you use graduated filters, there is a bit more freedom how you position them. Having said that, I usually ended up placing my grads with the cut-off in the middle, so no issues with a ring-mounted.

Also, if you use a Hasselblad, there is a very good lens shade for it, the newer of the two popular designs, which takes the square Lee filters and shields them from side illumination, which slightly reduces their flare.

Is multi-coating important with these?

Depends on what you photograph, and if you like or dislike the extra overall flare. If you like flare for its contrast reducing, shadow-compressing, softening effect, or if you photograph subjects low in contrast, then multi-coating is not important, and might be something you wish to actively avoid. If, however, you photograph subjects full of contrast (think of a back-illuminated checkerboard, or a source of light inside or close to the frame), and you do not want to soften it, or if shadow detail is particularly important to you, then multicoated filters together with a MC lens, hood, and careful framing will be very important, just like making sure the surfaces are relatively clean, camera interior well dull and black, and the lens board interior not reflective.