Help me choose a filter size for my lens collection

[Jeff Bannow]

It's about time I settle on a filter size, and I'm hoping to tap into some of your expertise here. I have (or plan to buy at some point) a variety of LF lenses in 4x5 and 6x17:

6x17
90mm F6.8 Caltar II-N - 67mm filter
Nikon 75mm f4.5 - 67mm filter
Nikon 135mm - 52mm filter
Nikon 210mm - ????

4x5
Nikkor 65mm f4 - 67mm filter
90mm f8 something - ????
Symmar-S 135mm - 49mm filter
G-Claron 240mm f9 - ????

It looks to me like a 67mm filter would work for these. My only concern with that is vignetting.

Would I be better off moving up to a 77mm size?

[Jeff Bannow]

And, while we are at it, how about recommendations for a good hood?

[cdholden]

72mm should eliminate any chance of vignetting. 77mm even more so.
A hat, hand or darkslide make an effective shade, and one less thing to carry. If you would rather free that hand, your nearest pro photo shop should have generic hoods to fit your filter thread of choice, probably $10-20.

[Bob Salomon]

And, while we are at it, how about recommendations for a good hood?

Hoods are not very good, Compendiums are, And many of them have filter holders built-in to them. They will not vignette regardless of the movement you use and on any lens from 75 or so up.

[ic-racer]

I'd look into one of those filter systems, like Lee or Cokin. As you probably know, a couple sets of those large screw-in filters can add up to more than you have invested in cameras and lenses.

Also, just because a LF lens has a filter thread on front does not always mean you can just put a standard filter in there and not have vignetting, because it depends on the film size you are using.

Also, remember to stop the lens all the way down to check for filter and compendium vignetting.

[vinny]

All my lenses 35mm-8x10 format have step up rings attached up to 82mm. The rings are dirt cheap on ebay. I Use 82mm tamron lens caps on all too. If a lens hits the ground, he filter ring takes the hit, not he front threads. Also, no vignetting. It's rare you'll find a lens with a ring larger than 82mm to. 82-72mm step down rings come in handy for filters you still own in the slightly smaller sizes. Round filters are not cheap neither is the lee filter system/hood i've invested in. Once you use it you won't go back.

CD-You need a hood, try setting up a shot w/o one when he sun is blasting the front element.

[cdholden]

CD-You need a hood, try setting up a shot w/o one when he sun is blasting the front element.

As a rule of thumb, I don't shoot into the sun. Problem solved.
Many of the older non-coated or single coated lenses flare at an angle. Straight on is even worse and isn't worth wasting my film on. I'll return at a later date/time or skip it altogether. I like to do landscapes, so for me, time is easier to work with than angle of view.

Chris

[Robert A. Zeichner]

Jeff,
A lot of whether a particular size of filter will vignette depends on the design of the lens. Usually (but not always) the lens manufacturers will design the front housing to be large enough in which to screw a filter without cutting into the field of view. When you stack filters, that can change. When you add a hood, even more so. Then again, IF you are using a lens designed for a format larger than the one you use, you might never see the vignetting. Many variables to consider. Of course I am a big proponent of using an adjustable shade over a hat or dark slide. You might check out my article on this subject. Should you decide to build one my barn door shades, you may want to settle on something bigger than 67mm. Of course, one other factor to consider in all of this is cost. The bigger filters can get expensive, particularly if you want coated ones.
http://web.mac.com/razeichner/RAZP_large_pix/Shade_pg_1.html

[Shadowtracker]

Nice Article Robert. Thanks for the link - I'm going to have to investigate this; it seems an easy approach that is flexible, light weight, and effective.

[Bob Salomon]

As a rule of thumb, I don't shoot into the sun. Problem solved.
Many of the older non-coated or single coated lenses flare at an angle. Straight on is even worse and isn't worth wasting my film on. I'll return at a later date/time or skip it altogether. I like to do landscapes, so for me, time is easier to work with than angle of view.

Chris

All lenses, uncoated, coated or multi-coated can flare at each glass to air surface. The difference is the amount of flare. And that will depend on if the lens is uncoated, coated or multi-coated and how the light rays strike the glass. Multi coated and a properly used compendium result in the least or no flare.

[neil poulsen]

If you can find one, you might consider a Zenophon filter holder that holds gel filters behind the lens. I've used a Zenophon 4" holder this way. I had a reducing adapter that held a smaller lensboard. I mounted the holder onto the adapter, so that I only needed one filter holder, versus one for each lensboard.

Another possibility is to connect the holder onto the back of each lensboard using velcro. So, you need only mount the holder when it's needed.

[cdholden]

All lenses, uncoated, coated or multi-coated can flare at each glass to air surface. The difference is the amount of flare. And that will depend on if the lens is uncoated, coated or multi-coated and how the light rays strike the glass. Multi coated and a properly used compendium result in the least or no flare.

Shooting into the sun, as Vinny suggested, is worst case scenario. A compendium isn't going to block that.

Chris

[cdholden]

If you can find one, you might consider a Zenophon filter holder that holds gel filters behind the lens.

If this is the Calumet product, there's one currently on a famous auction site. It's spelled "Xenophon" (for later reference).

[Jeff Bannow]

Thanks everyone for the advice!

Part of my issue is that with the 6x17, it will be shot handheld at least a portion of the time. That rules out anything to fiddly, and anything behind the lens wouldn't be an option.

[vinny]

Shooting into the sun, as Vinny suggested, is worst case scenario. A compendium isn't going to block that.

Chris

I didn't suggest shooting into the sun (photographing it). I'm talking about the being low enough in the sky to backlight the subject but high enough that it's out of frame. The sun's rays hit the lens and make it difficult to frame due to flare or shade with your hat since you don't know if you're photographing the had or not.

[Steve Goldstein]

You only need to worry about 4x5, the 6x17 doesn't have any movements. All the 90mm f/8s that I know of (Super-Angulon, Fujinon, Nikkor-SW, Acu-Veriwide) and the 90mm f/6.8 Grandagon-N take 67mm, and all have enough coverage that vignetting shouldn't be an issue on 4x5. This leaves you the 65mm Nikkor-SW to worry about, which also takes a 67mm filter.

How often do you expect to use the 65, and what would you be shooting with it? Would you always have it in your kit, or is it for special purposes only? If you're not always carrying it, does it justify saddling yourself with larger, more expensive, and slightly heavier 72mm or 77mm filters all the time? The Nikkor is specified with a 170mm image circle at f/16, so you're going to run out of movement pretty quick no matter what.

If it was me, I'd go for 67mm. Of course, I've got a bias because a couple of my Mamiya 7 lenses also use 67mm filters.

[Two23]

Hmmm. You guys got me thinking. I shoot with flash quite a bit and have some medium sized barn doors from Paul Buff for my big monolights. I also have a set of small barn doors I use for my SB-28 flash units. The look like this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/63894-REG/SP_Studio_Systems_SPBARN72_4_Leaf_Barndoor_Set.html


Kent in SD

[Jeff Bannow]

You only need to worry about 4x5, the 6x17 doesn't have any movements. All the 90mm f/8s that I know of (Super-Angulon, Fujinon, Nikkor-SW, Acu-Veriwide) and the 90mm f/6.8 Grandagon-N take 67mm, and all have enough coverage that vignetting shouldn't be an issue on 4x5. This leaves you the 65mm Nikkor-SW to worry about, which also takes a 67mm filter.

How often do you expect to use the 65, and what would you be shooting with it? Would you always have it in your kit, or is it for special purposes only? If you're not always carrying it, does it justify saddling yourself with larger, more expensive, and slightly heavier 72mm or 77mm filters all the time? The Nikkor is specified with a 170mm image circle at f/16, so you're going to run out of movement pretty quick no matter what.

If it was me, I'd go for 67mm. Of course, I've got a bias because a couple of my Mamiya 7 lenses also use 67mm filters.

Thanks Steve! The DaYi does actually have 20mm of shift.

I use the 65mm on 4x5 fairly regularly. I carry it all the time, although I do use it indoors more than outdoors.

[Steve Goldstein]

Jeff, be careful if you're look at an 90mm Ilex-Caltar Wide-Field. I had one once in the Seikosha shutter that had no front filter threads. It could have had 67mm threads, as it took a 70mm cap, but there were no threads. This seems a not-uncommon affliction in Ilexi, I have both 180 and 215 f/4.8 and neither of them has filter threads either. SKGrimes will make a very nice adapter gadget, but that's another $70 or so on top of the price of the lens.

I've heard great things about the Ilex 90 optically, though.