Filters on A 58-XL

[Scott Rosenberg]

good day,

can anyone with experience with a Super Angulon 58-XL please answer the following. i like to keep a protective filter on all of my lenses, usually a KR1.5. i would like to do so with my 58-XL, too. however, knowing the huge angle of coverage, i'm wondering if any filter that i add will vignette. would i have better luck:
1. first adding a 67mm kr1.5 then a step-up ring to 77mm (77 is my standard filter size)
2. first adding a 67-77mm step-up ring, then adding a 77mm protective filter
3. don't bother, it's all going to vignette

thanks,
scott

[adrian tyler]

i don't usually use center filters with my lenses, but i think that this one needs one even shooting negatives, unless you like a pronounced light-fall-off effect. so if i were you i'd forget the protective filter 'cos the chances are you will use the center filter, and all that screwing and unscrewing will drive you konkers.

[Frank Petronio]

Each filter adds another surface to flare. After spending all that money on your system, why would you stick a degrading device on the front unless you really needed to for the image (like a Polarizer, FLD, or center filter). Color tweaks can be done post process.

Of course I'd use a UV in a really nasty, salty place -- or in alpine conditions where there really is UV -- but for everyday just go naked.

If you need to rationalize this, after years of being conditioned by camera stores to put a $30 UV on a $100 80-200 35mm zoom, just think about what happens when you drop a lens with a UV filter on it... the broken UV is what scratches the front of your lens!

[Ed Richards]

With my 90mm, I found that using a step up ring caused more problems than just putting a regular sized (preferably thin) filter on.

[adrian tyler]

like frank says, it's a bit like puting a trailer on a porche.

[Wilbur Wong]

I guess I was also "brought up" to protect my lenses with filters. (UV, 1a 1b etc. etc.) I have graduated to using some fairly expensive glass on my view cameras and now use none, except intentional filtering.

I think I am very deliberate in my actions when photographing with a view camera and I am generally careful with my equipment as well. The strange thing I do is that I don't have filters on my snap shot cameras either, but I guess I don't care that they get a little beat up!

Lastly, any filter wouldn't have helped my 90mm f4.5 survive a 6 foot fall onto a parking lot pavement! (I still use the lens and it performs admirably even if the rear cell is dinged. The copal did not survive the fall and was replaced.)

[Steve Hamley]

Scott,

Option 1: Stacking unecessary filters on lenses this wide is nearly always a bad idea, but you can test it just by careful looking or shoot a test shot. The "protector" filter may keep you from using another one you need. Certainly you can't stack like you can with a long lens, but given the difference in filter thickness about all you can do is try a given configuration.

You can't do option 2 and use the center filter, the CF threads are 67mm on the lens side and 86mm on the sunny side. IMO, you want to preserve the option of using a center filter. You probably won't want it all the time, but there will be times you will, maybe most of the time.

I don't use a protector filter, but I nearly always use a center filter with my 55 mm Rodenstock unless I want or don't mind the fall off. I'd use it as a protector, attaching it immediately if I thought I needed it.

Option 3: Using the manufaturer's recommended center filter will not vignette, and you may be able to put a thin 86mm filter or polarizer on the CF. As above per variable filter thickness, try and see.

Steve

[Jack Flesher]

1) You WILL need the center filter, no quesstion, unless maybe you are shooting 6x7 with it.

2) The center filter has to be mounted closest to the lens to be effective as designed.

3) You would then need to "protect" the front of the center filter since it goes on first, and the front of the center filter is huge -- 86mm if I recall -- and 86mm filters of any description are pricey in themselves...

4) As mentioned, you now have four additional FLAT glass surfaces to bounce light around on a very wideangle lens -- NOT a good scenario...

[Scott Rosenberg]

thanks fellas... i'll be shooting with the lens 'naked' or dressed only in a center filter.

scott

[jhogan]

Scott, I use a 58xl for 4x5 fairly regularly, and have a few observations, if I may:

You'll definitely need the Schneider IIIb center filter; there is extreme fall-off without it regardless of film used. Unfortunately, it's an expensive but necessary accessory for this lens. As you may know, owning a IIIb has an upside: it's also the CF for the 80 and 110 xl lenses. Yet another reason to spend $$$.

In practice, I've found that almost anything vignettes the 58 outside the CF, especially at shooting apertures. This includes the special Lee screw-in adapter for the IIIb- even though it's designed to be unobtrusive. When the need to use other filters on the 58 arises (ND grads, CC, etc), I resort to taping them directly to the front of the CF. Not pretty, but a workable solution. (To be clear, this is not the case with the 80 or 110- the Lee system works perfectly as intended with these lenses.) I've made it a habit to carefully check for any sign of vignetting through the gg clipped corners when using the 58, especially when using the slightest movements...

As others have pointed out, "protective" filters aren't really needed with a lens like this. No doubt you'll always be handling it with care, with caps on until ready for use. Extra glass only serves to degrade the image such a lens is capable of producing.

Hope this helps.