tazz19
Active member
I'm using the HGD1758 with the Yoshida adapter. Has anyone tried a UV or polarizing filter between the teleconverter and the adapter?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
UV and polarizing filters with telconverters?
- Thread starter tazz19
- Start date
ssteppe
Senior Member
I had a UV filter attached between my FZ1 and my TCON-17 (only reason was hold the TCON more securely at the time). Frankly, there's no real reason to use a UV filter if you're using the Yoshida adapter.
However, a polarizer would be useful. No reason why it shouldn't work.
-Steve
However, a polarizer would be useful. No reason why it shouldn't work.
-Steve
Godfrey
Forum Pro
There's certainly no point to fitting a UV filter behind the teleconverter especially on a digital camera.
A polarizer might be useful but there are caveats:
Godfrey
A polarizer might be useful but there are caveats:
- Adding any lens or filter behind the teleconverter both adds more air-glass surfaces for internal flare and moves the converter further from the prime lens, inducing more chromatic aberration. While technically possible, the results might show marked image deterioration.
- Polarizers in particular are normally a rotating mount element devices with a relatlively thin set of filter thread in front and behind. I would worry about the mechanical strength of the polarizer's rotating mount to support a big, heavy lens like a Sony HGD1758 hung on the front of it. If you try it, be sure to handle the camera and lens carefully!!
Godfrey
playlong
Well-known member
Right on, except for a few additional items. If you want good telephoto shots you need, at a minimum, a UV / pollution filter and a lens shade and tripod. Haze, unless you are lucky, usually shows up in all zoom shots. Remember the FZ10 has a 12x telephoto. Always have a throwaway filter to protect the front element of any lens. You would be surprised how little impact on the front outside ring can destroy your optics investment. Let the filter ring or shade take the impact. Mount your filter on the front optic never behind.
A circular polarizer has a neutral position and can cut down on glare from water, metal objects and enhance the sky. Do you walk outside without sunglasses? Treat your camera the same way.
The correct sequence for the FZ10 should be: 1) third party adapter, 2) UV and Polarizer filters, and 3) Lens shade
or
1) third party adapter 2) wide angle or telephoto enhancer 3) UV and polarizer fiilters and 4) Lens shade.
I know you spent money on the HGD1758 but do not go cheep now. Yes filters larger then 55mm cost money. But these items complete the performance package.
I put camera and automoble dealers at the same level of honesty. Do not ask.
Snap Got-Ya
Jerry Klein
A circular polarizer has a neutral position and can cut down on glare from water, metal objects and enhance the sky. Do you walk outside without sunglasses? Treat your camera the same way.
The correct sequence for the FZ10 should be: 1) third party adapter, 2) UV and Polarizer filters, and 3) Lens shade
or
1) third party adapter 2) wide angle or telephoto enhancer 3) UV and polarizer fiilters and 4) Lens shade.
I know you spent money on the HGD1758 but do not go cheep now. Yes filters larger then 55mm cost money. But these items complete the performance package.
I put camera and automoble dealers at the same level of honesty. Do not ask.
--
Snap Got-Ya
Jerry Klein
gil
Forum Pro
Good input as always but there is a problem with some TCs - no filter thread for the likes of TCON-17 and Canon TL-55. The TCON-14B has (I think) an 84mm filter thread. The Raynox 2.2X also has a large filter thread but less than 84mm.
gil
playlong
Well-known member
rsrascal
Senior Member
Hi playlong,
Who makes, or better yet who sells, these press on adapters? I'm probably going to looking for one for my TL-55 which is to be delivered via UPS tomorrow.
Cheers, Gene
Who makes, or better yet who sells, these press on adapters? I'm probably going to looking for one for my TL-55 which is to be delivered via UPS tomorrow.
Cheers, Gene
Godfrey
Forum Pro
Hate to disagree with you but there are some things ...
I live in "the other camp" ... I NEVER use filters for protection except in extraordinary circumstances. A screw in lens hood and a lens cap are the best protection. Another piece of glass only incites more opportunities for flare and image degradation, no matter how good it is and how good its antireflection coating is. I ONLY use a protection filter if I'm shooting in rain, gritty, sandy, windy conditions, usually near the ocean.
Also UV "pollution" filters are a waste of time on a digital camera. If you need to remove haze (which is ultraviolet scatter off dust and water in the air), image processing (blue reduction with masking and sharpening) does a better job, and can be adjusted to exactly match the level of removal necessary. You can buy dedicated plug-in filter modules for Photoshop that do this far far better than any filter does.
I completely agree about a lens hood, but there are situations with a teleconverter where it's not very practical (see below).
On the FZ10, I pulled off the trim ring, fitted the lens hood, and put a generic 72mm clip-on lens cap on the end of the lens hood. That's the way it stays now, ready to use. Much better and much less likely to have any damage to the lens that way.
When I want to fit a filter or close-up lens, I remove the hood, fit the PD62 adapter, and mount 62mm or smaller filters with a thin stepdown ring, and fit a lens hood on that. The telecons also fit on the front of the adapter.
You don't need a circular polarizer for the FZ10 ... It has no mirrors or beam splitters in the optical path that can be affected by polarized light. Multicoated linear polarizers are thinner, simpler, degrade the image less, and are cheaper too.
Fine in theory but it doesn't pan out that way practically speaking ...
The HGD1758 has a front bezel diameter about 95mm in size. You'd need a HUGE whopping slip-on adapter (as it is not threaded), a $180 polarizer, and you'd need to make a lens hood since no one makes one for it.
I don't normally recommend fitting a polarizer or any other filter/closeup lens behind a teleconverter lens, but in this case it's really the only practical way to do it. I would make a lens hood out of a nicely sized piece of thinwall PVC tubing and use a hose-clamp to fix it to the lens. You are never going to carry the FZ10 around with a 2lb teleconverter hanging off the front casually anyway, and I'd recommend a tripod mount too but you have to make it ...
DO NOT try to mount the camera with that telecon on a tripod without making a lens support and tripod mount!
Godfrey
ps: frankly, all the compromises that this stuff entails is why I normally do anything out of the ordinary with a Canon DSLR ... It's a system camera designed for these kinds of extraordinary uses. For the most part, you're better off using the FZ10 just as it sits, lens hood in place, and leaving it at that.
But of course if it's the camera you have to work with, you do what's necessary to get the picture you want...
playlong
Well-known member
Sorry I was not able to find any. they used to make then about 10 years ago. Very sorry.
Snap Got-Ya
Jerry Klein
--
Snap Got-Ya
Jerry Klein
playlong
Well-known member
Hi Godfrey, it is nice to hear from the opposing camp. I have been taking photographs since 1947 and there have always been two opposing camps. All the issues were completely debated except for the following
DO NOT try to mount the camera with that telecon on a tripod without making a lens support and tripod mount!
I called and sent an email to Panasonic yesterday.
“This is a weight question and requires a yes no answer. Can the FZ10’s tripod mount support exactly 600 grams attached to the front of the camera body?” The verbal answer was no problem. I await the email reply.
You do not need a circular polarizer for the FZ10 ... It has no mirrors or beam splitters in the optical path that can be affected by polarized light. Multicoated linear polarizers are thinner, simpler, degrade the image less, and are cheaper too.
I find that the ring gives me variable control and dose not distort colors and only costs 2 f stops. Who cares when your starting with 2.8.
Snap Got-Ya
Jerry Klein
DO NOT try to mount the camera with that telecon on a tripod without making a lens support and tripod mount!
I called and sent an email to Panasonic yesterday.
“This is a weight question and requires a yes no answer. Can the FZ10’s tripod mount support exactly 600 grams attached to the front of the camera body?” The verbal answer was no problem. I await the email reply.
You do not need a circular polarizer for the FZ10 ... It has no mirrors or beam splitters in the optical path that can be affected by polarized light. Multicoated linear polarizers are thinner, simpler, degrade the image less, and are cheaper too.
I find that the ring gives me variable control and dose not distort colors and only costs 2 f stops. Who cares when your starting with 2.8.
--Hate to disagree with you but there are some things ...
I live in "the other camp" ... I NEVER use filters for protection
except in extraordinary circumstances. A screw in lens hood and a
lens cap are the best protection. Another piece of glass only
incites more opportunities for flare and image degradation, no
matter how good it is and how good its antireflection coating is. I
ONLY use a protection filter if I'm shooting in rain, gritty,
sandy, windy conditions, usually near the ocean.
Also UV "pollution" filters are a waste of time on a digital
camera. If you need to remove haze (which is ultraviolet scatter
off dust and water in the air), image processing (blue reduction
with masking and sharpening) does a better job, and can be adjusted
to exactly match the level of removal necessary. You can buy
dedicated plug-in filter modules for Photoshop that do this far far
better than any filter does.
I completely agree about a lens hood, but there are situations with
a teleconverter where it's not very practical (see below).
On the FZ10, I pulled off the trim ring, fitted the lens hood, and
put a generic 72mm clip-on lens cap on the end of the lens hood.
That's the way it stays now, ready to use. Much better and much
less likely to have any damage to the lens that way.
When I want to fit a filter or close-up lens, I remove the hood,
fit the PD62 adapter, and mount 62mm or smaller filters with a thin
stepdown ring, and fit a lens hood on that. The telecons also fit
on the front of the adapter.
You don't need a circular polarizer for the FZ10 ... It has no
mirrors or beam splitters in the optical path that can be affected
by polarized light. Multicoated linear polarizers are thinner,
simpler, degrade the image less, and are cheaper too.
Fine in theory but it doesn't pan out that way practically speaking
...
The HGD1758 has a front bezel diameter about 95mm in size. You'd
need a HUGE whopping slip-on adapter (as it is not threaded), a
$180 polarizer, and you'd need to make a lens hood since no one
makes one for it.
I don't normally recommend fitting a polarizer or any other
filter/closeup lens behind a teleconverter lens, but in this case
it's really the only practical way to do it. I would make a lens
hood out of a nicely sized piece of thinwall PVC tubing and use a
hose-clamp to fix it to the lens. You are never going to carry the
FZ10 around with a 2lb teleconverter hanging off the front casually
anyway, and I'd recommend a tripod mount too but you have to make
it ...
DO NOT try to mount the camera with that telecon on a tripod
without making a lens support and tripod mount!
Godfrey
ps: frankly, all the compromises that this stuff entails is why I
normally do anything out of the ordinary with a Canon DSLR ... It's
a system camera designed for these kinds of extraordinary uses. For
the most part, you're better off using the FZ10 just as it sits,
lens hood in place, and leaving it at that.
But of course if it's the camera you have to work with, you do
what's necessary to get the picture you want...
Snap Got-Ya
Jerry Klein
Godfrey
Forum Pro
The tripod mounting lug on the body is a 1/4"-20 metal insert into a plastic body and chassis. Adding a 600g (1.3 US lb) weight to the end of a PD62, attached via a 62-58mm step-down adapter ring with 3 to 4 threads on each side at most is a little insecure but doable (note that the Sony lens' front bezel is a full 8 threads deep to support these heavy components properly). But then hanging that whole thing 4 inches in front of the securing support, you're putting at least a .5 lb-ft torque on the body. If I photographed the camera with a laser interferometer, you would see the lines of stress as the plastic body stressed. Now, if your tripod platform is deep enough, it would engage the entire foot of the camera, including the stepped portion on the underside of the lens housing, and reduce stress on the body by a great deal.
So the body would survive. But then again, the proper way to fit a heavy camera/lens assembly to a tripod head is to center the mass over the tripod head. This gives you the most stable platform and prevents inadvertant damage. So make a plate that bolts to the body with a clamp on it to surround and secure the converter lens, and put a tripod mount under the lens so that you can balance the rig properly.
Yeah, I've spent the past twenty years in the company of engineers... ;-)
Huh? I said nothing against using a polarizer when appropriate. I've simply stated that you do not need a CIRCULAR polarizer, a linear polarizer will do as good if not better job and be cheaper.
Godfrey
playlong
Well-known member
Hi Greg
1) The tripod mount question directed toward Panasonic was strictly a weight issue and did not refer to the configuration in the thread. It does refer to my plan. I intend to use a PD62 aluminum adapter 55 grams, a TCON-14B 475 grams, and a filter and rubber len shade 50 grams a total of 580 grams / 1.256 pounds. The extra 20 grams was fluff. I consider the total aforementioned, pieces in my weight calculation and believe it is two and 2/3inches from the front to the securing support.
2) The tripod securing plate and the offset female mount dissipates some of the torque. The direction of stress instead of being front to back is on an angle increasing the camera and tripod contact mass.
3) It will cost $332 for the adapter, TCON-14B, a set of 82mm UV circular polarizer filters and a rubber lens shade. How much are you going to save me by substituting a linear?
4) The pictures at Storm King http://-jerry-.smugmug.com/Art were shot with a Nikon F3, 50mm F1.4 a stacked set of UV and circular polarizer filters with a rubber lens shade. On this day, I used the polarizer to boost the UV filtering and punch the color saturation. A fellow who lives 14 miles from Storm King wanted to know when I took these pictures. He could not remember the last sunny day. Pollution / Haze anyone? I took one picture of each sculpture and took notes on shade and sun direction. The sun came out for 90 minutesr. I shot separate pictures of the sky from different angles for subsequent matching. I then created a sandwich of subject with sky using PhotoImpact. Appropriate use of UV in my part of the country is 340 days a year
5) I managed hardware and software engineers for 25 years and was in the business for 34. My motto is “whenever possible let the hardware to it.”
The front filter issue will never be resolved in this forum; it has never been resolved in any other forum. It has never been resolved my 57 years of photography. I wish you luck in your new endeavor and I enjoy your work.
Snap Got-Ya
Jerry Klein
1) The tripod mount question directed toward Panasonic was strictly a weight issue and did not refer to the configuration in the thread. It does refer to my plan. I intend to use a PD62 aluminum adapter 55 grams, a TCON-14B 475 grams, and a filter and rubber len shade 50 grams a total of 580 grams / 1.256 pounds. The extra 20 grams was fluff. I consider the total aforementioned, pieces in my weight calculation and believe it is two and 2/3inches from the front to the securing support.
2) The tripod securing plate and the offset female mount dissipates some of the torque. The direction of stress instead of being front to back is on an angle increasing the camera and tripod contact mass.
3) It will cost $332 for the adapter, TCON-14B, a set of 82mm UV circular polarizer filters and a rubber lens shade. How much are you going to save me by substituting a linear?
4) The pictures at Storm King http://-jerry-.smugmug.com/Art were shot with a Nikon F3, 50mm F1.4 a stacked set of UV and circular polarizer filters with a rubber lens shade. On this day, I used the polarizer to boost the UV filtering and punch the color saturation. A fellow who lives 14 miles from Storm King wanted to know when I took these pictures. He could not remember the last sunny day. Pollution / Haze anyone? I took one picture of each sculpture and took notes on shade and sun direction. The sun came out for 90 minutesr. I shot separate pictures of the sky from different angles for subsequent matching. I then created a sandwich of subject with sky using PhotoImpact. Appropriate use of UV in my part of the country is 340 days a year
5) I managed hardware and software engineers for 25 years and was in the business for 34. My motto is “whenever possible let the hardware to it.”
The front filter issue will never be resolved in this forum; it has never been resolved in any other forum. It has never been resolved my 57 years of photography. I wish you luck in your new endeavor and I enjoy your work.
--
Snap Got-Ya
Jerry Klein
steve_fz10
Leading Member
Hi, I have a thread where my question was that my hoya UV filter is extremely tight fit on my yoshida adaptor and was interested to know if any one else experienced this! Its the cheapest uv so i guess its not multicoated and the feedback was that as i could only get it on about 1 thread of the yoshida adaptor it wouldnt be a good idea to hang a tele off that! Also it seems apparent that the multicoated filters have a slightly finer thread(for want of a better word) so they are a better fit. Personally i wouldnt use a filter in between anyway as i dont see it as being very useful! Are you happy with the hgd1758 as it looks like i will be purchasing one soon to fit my yoshida 58mm adaptor. steve
Godfrey
Forum Pro
Typically, quality linear polarizers cost 1/2 to 2/3 the same a circular polarizers of similar quality and are more efficient polarizers.
Inefficient in many cases today. Software is often both more flexible (it can be improved for less money), faster, and cheaper.
LOL ... I know. It's like a religious war ... There's neither reason for it nor any way to stop it.
Thank you for the compliment. ;-)
Godfrey
tazz19
Active member
Hi, Steve,
The hgd1758 seems like a terrific lens though a bit heavy. My arms actually became a bit tired from trying to steady the camera enough to shoot. A tripod is definitely a huge benefit with the lens expecially if you plan to use digital zoom. The lens fits the Yoshida adapter extremely well. I have had it for just a couple days. I wanted to see what I gained from having it compared to the full zoom on the FZ10 and how the digital zoom worked with the lens. The thing is, this size zoom lets you get shots you'd never be able to get otherwise. A new t.v. antenna is being erected in town, they are at about 1000 feet right now, I'd guess, I took closeup pictures of the three guys walking around on the antenna and the scaffolding. Amazing! They were hand-held though and the sky conditions were miserable so very low contrast. Anyway, I loved just seeing these guys work. Here are some less interesting zoom comparisons I took with a tripod. The last two were taken with the hgd1758 (pic #7; 432mm*1.7X)and (pic #8; 432mm*1.7X* 3X optical zoom; [a pretty poor capture]).
http://www.sendpix.com/albums/04070815/5nxhstglbx/
1 antenna pic (432mm*1.7X)
http://www.sendpix.com/albums/04071010/i30xgj4x9l/
Mike
The hgd1758 seems like a terrific lens though a bit heavy. My arms actually became a bit tired from trying to steady the camera enough to shoot. A tripod is definitely a huge benefit with the lens expecially if you plan to use digital zoom. The lens fits the Yoshida adapter extremely well. I have had it for just a couple days. I wanted to see what I gained from having it compared to the full zoom on the FZ10 and how the digital zoom worked with the lens. The thing is, this size zoom lets you get shots you'd never be able to get otherwise. A new t.v. antenna is being erected in town, they are at about 1000 feet right now, I'd guess, I took closeup pictures of the three guys walking around on the antenna and the scaffolding. Amazing! They were hand-held though and the sky conditions were miserable so very low contrast. Anyway, I loved just seeing these guys work. Here are some less interesting zoom comparisons I took with a tripod. The last two were taken with the hgd1758 (pic #7; 432mm*1.7X)and (pic #8; 432mm*1.7X* 3X optical zoom; [a pretty poor capture]).
http://www.sendpix.com/albums/04070815/5nxhstglbx/
1 antenna pic (432mm*1.7X)
http://www.sendpix.com/albums/04071010/i30xgj4x9l/
Mike
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum