Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,568   Posts: 1,621,835   Online: 804
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11
    darinwc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,144
    Images
    159
    I have a warming filter allways on my 17mm nFD. I have never had any problems with vigineting due to the filter.
    However, I have noticed considerable increase in flare when I use the filter. With a very wide angle lens like that, it is often impossible to keep bright areas of sun and sky from hitting the front of the lens. The lens itself is reasonably resistant to flare, but with the filter on it is noticeable even in the viewfinder.
    So.. get a good filter like the hoya SMC, BW, or heliopan, and tryu a few frames with and without the filter.

    Photo.net also has a good FD forum

  2. #12
    cooltouch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    340
    Hey Krzys (or Jeff) --

    How is the distortion with this lens? I have a Vivitar 17mm f/3.5 in FD. It's a pretty sharp lens, but it has quite noticeable barrel distortion. Couldn't afford the Canon at the time I bought the Viv. One thing I do like about the Vivitar is it has built-in "wings" that act as a hood in a small way.

    Michael

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,932
    Quote Originally Posted by cooltouch View Post
    Hey Krzys (or Jeff) --

    How is the distortion with this lens? I have a Vivitar 17mm f/3.5 in FD. It's a pretty sharp lens, but it has quite noticeable barrel distortion. Couldn't afford the Canon at the time I bought the Viv. One thing I do like about the Vivitar is it has built-in "wings" that act as a hood in a small way.

    Michael
    Yes there is distortion (of course there is distortion in my brain!) I also have a Fish eye FD lense which is even more so. This may sound strange but I kinda like the distortion.

    Jeff

  4. #14
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,546
    Stopping down has no effect on your angle of view (focusing, of course, does). If the filter is encroaching on the angle of view, it is always in the angle view, no matter what the aperture. At large apertures, of course, near objects are poorly defined, as the COCs are large, therefore you need to stop down all the way to check. Since your widest angle of view is at infinity, you should also focus at infinity to check the corners for vignetting.

    Just as a related example, with an SLR you can hold any object (like a pencil or finger) right in front of the lens (where the filter would be), and as long as the aperture is wider than the object you can 'see through' the object.

    Try it. Put a pencil in front of the lens and stop down until you can just no longer 'see through' the pencil. Then check the aperture size, it will approximate the width of the pencil.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,006
    Images
    4
    Vignetting is a big problem with many filters, and you can often see it right in the viewfinder. I have never tried a slim filter. It might work.

    If you screw filters all the way in, they can contact the high spot on the front glass. My copy came with a permanent mark in this area. Maybe slim filters would cure this problem as well. What I did was to permanently install a spring retaining ring from a cheap 72mm filter into the bottom of the threaded area on the lens. This keeps any filter from being able to screw all the way in.

    Ic-racer...the person who mentioned vignetting being related to aperture was mentioning it in regards to the lens without any filter.

    I have never noticed bad vignetting or barrel distortion with this lens. It just seems like it is not the sharpest tool in the shed. Not horrible, just not amazing.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  6. #16
    darinwc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,144
    Images
    159
    2F: Some people would disagree with you and say the 17mm FD is plenty sharp.
    Do you shoot mainly handheld? What version of the lens do you have?

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Scarsdale, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    73
    A few years ago I bought a 16mm Zenitar;price was right for the very limited use that I gave it. I had used it on one of my DSLR's and shot a roll of B&W with it on a 35mm body. Decided that it was fun on the film body and threw it in a drawer. This thread reminded me about it and gave me an idea for a project (on film) with it. Interestingly enough, this lens came with a couple of filters that mount on the back of the lens;something that I had not seen before. Does anybody know if rear mounted filters give the same result as front mounted filters? I think that I've seen some reference to this type of filter being used on certain large telephotos, presumably because the giant front filter that would be required?

  8. #18
    Krzys's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Brisbane, QLD, Australia
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    506
    Images
    11
    They wouldn't give the result I'm after! (Protection)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin