Small filters for big lenses

[engbert]

The Nikon 80-400mm af-s shown here takes a 77mm filter. But on a Dx camera, filters do not need to be anywhere near that wide. Here are step down rings from 77 to 62mm, which allow the use of 62mm accessories. There is no vignetting even at 80mm.

Thus I can use a 62mm lens shade, in this case 36mm long. (Longer ones may cause vignetting at 80mm. This also provides excellent mechanical protection for the lens without the use of UV filters which reduce light transmission and are sometimes very expensive.

If you are exposed to spray or blowing sand, you can add a UV filter before or after the shade.

I can also use a Nikon 5T or 6T close up lens, which delivers fairly good macro ability, or any other accessory, such as a polarizer.


Nikon 80-400mm AF-S with Nikon 5T achromat close up lens, 62mm mount.

The Sigma 50-500mm OS came with a 95 to 86mm step down ring to be used on Dx cameras, but I found that 62mm was sufficient there too. I have sold that now, and await the new Tamron 150-600mm which fits a 95mm mount. I hope to use the same arrangement on it.

The smaller filter allows the d7100 + 80-400mm af-s with its lens shade to fit in the holster case easily, making it rapidly available on my walks.




Tamrac #5630 Pro Digital Zoom 10



--
www.pbase.com/bertramm
pbase & dpreview supporter

 

[engbert]

In the note above I said you could put a filter either before or after the 62mm lens shade.

However, the outer end of that particular lens shade is 67mm. So you can use a 62mm before the lens shade or a 67mm after the lens shade.

As far as the Nikon 5T is concerned, I have not been able to tell if it makes any difference. More step down rings are on the way from China.

--
www.pbase.com/bertramm
pbase & dpreview supporter

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

The Nikon 80-400mm af-s shown here takes a 77mm filter. But on a Dx camera, filters do not need to be anywhere near that wide.

If you use a filter smaller than 77mm at the 400mm setting light transmission into the lens is reduced by about 1 stop.

I am not saying you cannot use smaller filters - but just need to be aware you are reducing the effective aperture from f5.6 at 400mm to around f8.

 

[engbert]

The Nikon 80-400mm af-s shown here takes a 77mm filter. But on a Dx camera, filters do not need to be anywhere near that wide.

If you use a filter smaller than 77mm at the 400mm setting light transmission into the lens is reduced by about 1 stop.

I am not saying you cannot use smaller filters - but just need to be aware you are reducing the effective aperture from f5.6 at 400mm to around f8.

--
A great painter gets credit for artistic skill rather than owning marvellous brushes. Maybe photographers should challenge the common assumption a great photograph requires no more than a marvellous camera.

Thank you for the note, which got my attention because I have been using this kind of lens shade for a long time.

So I did some tests.

I set up my camera w the 80-400 at 400mm on a good tripod and remote, and took a series of photos of a bowl of fruit with the 62mm lens shade attached to the 77-62mm step down ring. In incandescent light (it was about 5am here), with ISO fixed at 1,600 in Aperture priority getting readings of 1/15 at f8 it made no difference with the shade on or off.

Next I switched to manual exposure and took some pictures with the hood on and off, loaded them into Photoshop and used both the eyedropper and the difference blending mode. There were some minor and inconsistent differences which were suggestive of a small effect, but nowhere near a stop.

But then I did a series of 6 all with the shade on and found that there were just as many differences between shots. I then did 4 more at 80mm and saw the same minor differences between shots.

So I cannot confirm your observation. Can you give any sources? Have you done any tests yourself? If there is some more info on this I would do a more elaborate set of tests.

--
www.pbase.com/bertramm
pbase & dpreview supporter

 

[inasir1971]

The Nikon 80-400mm af-s shown here takes a 77mm filter. But on a Dx camera, filters do not need to be anywhere near that wide.

If you use a filter smaller than 77mm at the 400mm setting light transmission into the lens is reduced by about 1 stop.

I am not saying you cannot use smaller filters - but just need to be aware you are reducing the effective aperture from f5.6 at 400mm to around f8.

--
A great painter gets credit for artistic skill rather than owning marvellous brushes. Maybe photographers should challenge the common assumption a great photograph requires no more than a marvellous camera.

Thank you for the note, which got my attention because I have been using this kind of lens shade for a long time.

So I did some tests.

I set up my camera w the 80-400 at 400mm on a good tripod and remote, and took a series of photos of a bowl of fruit with the 62mm lens shade attached to the 77-62mm step down ring. In incandescent light (it was about 5am here), with ISO fixed at 1,600 in Aperture priority getting readings of 1/15 at f8 it made no difference with the shade on or off.

But have you checked to whether there is any difference when shooting at f/5.6? Stopping down to f/8 blocks the more peripheral light which is likely what is obstructed by the shade.

Next I switched to manual exposure and took some pictures with the hood on and off, loaded them into Photoshop and used both the eyedropper and the difference blending mode. There were some minor and inconsistent differences which were suggestive of a small effect, but nowhere near a stop.

But then I did a series of 6 all with the shade on and found that there were just as many differences between shots. I then did 4 more at 80mm and saw the same minor differences between shots.

So I cannot confirm your observation. Can you give any sources? Have you done any tests yourself? If there is some more info on this I would do a more elaborate set of tests.

--
www.pbase.com/bertramm
pbase & dpreview supporter

 

[engbert]

The Nikon 80-400mm af-s shown here takes a 77mm filter. But on a Dx camera, filters do not need to be anywhere near that wide.

If you use a filter smaller than 77mm at the 400mm setting light transmission into the lens is reduced by about 1 stop.

I am not saying you cannot use smaller filters - but just need to be aware you are reducing the effective aperture from f5.6 at 400mm to around f8.