Many schools of thought here and many opinions on it as well
Obviously one is to protect your front element from let’s say getting scratched.
Second is why use a 20 dollar piece of glass in front of a 1000 dollar lens.
Third going along with number 2 is it may degrade image, cause flare and ghosting.
Four just use a lens hood to protect your front element , no filter
Five protect lens from the elements like sea water , mud and such
Again the reasoning is personal to your beliefs on how comfortable you are as certainly we all agree no one wants a big repair bill and replacing there front element. So many schools of thought. My personal preference and 4 decades of shooting I never scratched a front element and that’s a ton of lenses and maybe over millions of images. I don’t use any filter unless I am in the elements that I know there is a good chance it would happen. Let’s say motor cross for instance with mud flying everywhere. Sea salt and water the list goes on but anyway I use metal screw in hoods and the CV 40 has a nice one included. Now what I do may not match what you feel comfortable with and totally understand that but if you do buy a filter than at least buy a very good one and not like a Amazon basic. Look for one that’s optically good and not going to cause many flare issues and such. B&W , Breakthrough Photography make some if the best and I recommend them. I like Breakthrough Photgraphy filters myself and use there ND and CPL filters. I say at least put a top notch filter on if you go down this road. Fair warning I buy the best I can buy and that’s my preference.
DavidBM wrote:
There should be very little difference between the performance with quality two or more element achromats. It’s really about getting the strength that allows you to focus at the distance you want with the lens set between 3m and infinity.
Like you, I've been playing with this for a while David.
What I've learned is that with the 40/1.2, we should avoid the 0.35m until 0.7m wide open if optimal sharpness/contrast is important for the scene. Starting at 1m, sharpness and contrast becomes very good and from 2m to infinity, it's outstanding for a f/1.2 lens.
Now, which achromat lens to use?
Since the trouble area is 0.35-0.7m, using a weak achromat like the Elpro 4 (0.75+) or Minolta N.0 (0.94+) do not increase IQ that much since it positions the focusing ring in areas where it's still not optimum OR it changes the lens distance to already optimal distances (>1m)...For example, if may change the lens distance from 1.3m to ~ 5m but at 1.3m, IQ is already great and there isn't much difference going to 5m...The main difference is going from the weak distances to anywhere above 1m...
So, currently I am only using close-up lenses that give me that range:
1) Elpro 3 (1.66+): This close-up lens, positions the lens' ring at infinity when shooting at 0.7m. It also gives great IQ when shooting at 0.5m (1.5m at the lens). It can be used for tight portraits or when your subject is at around 0.5 to 0.7m.
2) Marumi (5+): This one let's you shoot a bit closer than MDF with high IQ. So, the distance will be about 0.2-0.3m and the lens set infinity. Great for close-up flowers. Alternatively the Canon 250D (4+) would also work great.
3) Marumi (3+): It may increase the close up range, I'm calculating 0.35m until 0.5m. I have not tried this filter yet but it could be an alternative to the 5x for a bit more range at close-ups. Alternative to this would be the Canon 500D (2+)
Of course there is the Raynox which should provide even better IQ since it has more corrective elements. I have not tried this one yet just because of its size.
I don't typically use filters either. The one exception being a B&W F-PRO Neutral MRC that I conned myself into buying for my Zony 35 f1.4 on my last trip. I would have been fine without it though.
What I do recommend is the Lens hoodie. It fits over the lens hood and gives the lens a bit of extra neoprene padding. Not needing to fidget with the lens cap is nice and the hoodie will fit in your pocket and not scratch up against your phone the way lens caps do.
So far I like setting focus assist and focus peeking to "Off". Center Button set to Focus Magnifier.
I find the A7r3 and A9 viewfinder to have enough resolution to nail critical focus without relying on peeking. Using focus peeking seemed to give me less keepers, and I found it to be distracting.
Really enjoy shooting with the Nocton!! Big thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread. It's an awesome lens on so many levels.
I don't typically use filters either. The one exception being a B&W F-PRO Neutral MRC that I conned myself into buying for my Zony 35 f1.4 on my last trip. I would have been fine without it though.
What I do recommend is the Lens hoodie. It fits over the lens hood and gives the lens a bit of extra neoprene padding. Not needing to fidget with the lens cap is nice and the hoodie will fit in your pocket and not scratch up against your phone the way lens caps do.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I've avoided lens hoodies because something could press against the neoprene and rub the hoodie against the front element. Moreover, if there's any dust there it would get ground into to glass. I like neoprene for lens cases, not in lieu of lens caps, but maybe I just don't get it.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Like you, I've been playing with this for a while David.
What I've learned is that with the 40/1.2, we should avoid the 0.35m until 0.7m wide open if optimal sharpness/contrast is important for the scene. Starting at 1m, sharpness and contrast becomes very good and from 2m to infinity, it's outstanding for a f/1.2 lens.
Now, which achromat lens to use?
Since the trouble area is 0.35-0.7m, using a weak achromat like the Elpro 4 (0.75+) or Minolta N.0 (0.94+) do not increase IQ that much since it positions the focusing ring in areas where it's still not optimum OR it changes the lens distance to already optimal distances (>1m)...For example, if may change the lens distance from 1.3m to ~ 5m but at 1.3m, IQ is already great and there isn't much difference going to 5m...The main difference is going from the weak distances to anywhere above 1m...
So, currently I am only using close-up lenses that give me that range:
1) Elpro 3 (1.66+): This close-up lens, positions the lens' ring at infinity when shooting at 0.7m. It also gives great IQ when shooting at 0.5m (1.5m at the lens). It can be used for tight portraits or when your subject is at around 0.5 to 0.7m.
2) Marumi (5+): This one let's you shoot a bit closer than MDF with high IQ. So, the distance will be about 0.2-0.3m and the lens set infinity. Great for close-up flowers. Alternatively the Canon 250D (4+) would also work great.
3) Marumi (3+): It may increase the close up range, I'm calculating 0.35m until 0.5m. I have not tried this filter yet but it could be an alternative to the 5x for a bit more range at close-ups. Alternative to this would be the Canon 500D (2+)
Of course there is the Raynox which should provide even better IQ since it has more corrective elements. I have not tried this one yet just because of its size.
The Raynox is a LOT bigger, so unless you already have it if you are getting results you like with the Marumi it may not be worth it. The +2 component isn’t huge, though it is 72mm, but then it’s two element so is unlikely to be better than any other good two element job. The +3 is great, but very big, and together to give a five element +5 it’s massive though very good. Good coatings too.
As for the 0.75 strength, I think there’s some difference going from having the lens set around 1-1.3m to around 5m, though I agree it’s not dramatic like it is with closer distances.
There are also some other filter articles on that site.
NDs are generally for intentionally increasing shutter speed in order to accomplish a desired creative effect. However, this lens is so bright, it can be hard to shoot wide open in very bright sun. The Sony crop body cameras have a minimum shutter speed of 1/4000 (full frame goes to 1/8000), and I've run into that limitation a few times with bright lenses. Moreover, on Sony full frame cameras (again, not crop cameras), you can also dial ISO to less than 100, which you normally would not want to do (slight reduction in dynamic range), but the penalty is not large, and making the camera a little less sensitive can help you access the wide aperture. Beyond those, if it's still too bright, sure, you could situationally use a minimal ND filter if you can't get the exposure you seek otherwise.
Fred Miranda wrote:
So, currently I am only using close-up lenses that give me that range:
1) Elpro 3 (1.66+): This close-up lens, positions the lens' ring at infinity when shooting at 0.7m. It also gives great IQ when shooting at 0.5m (1.5m at the lens). It can be used for tight portraits or when your subject is at around 0.5 to 0.7m.
2) Marumi (5+): This one let's you shoot a bit closer than MDF with high IQ. So, the distance will be about 0.2-0.3m and the lens set infinity. Great for close-up flowers. Alternatively the Canon 250D (4+) would also work great.
3) Marumi (3+): It may increase the close up range, I'm calculating 0.35m until 0.5m. I have not tried this filter yet but it could be an alternative to the 5x for a bit more range at close-ups. Alternative to this would be the Canon 500D (2+)
Of course there is the Raynox which should provide even better IQ since it has more corrective elements. I have not tried this one yet just because of its size....Show more →
Fred, thanks for summary, bookmarked... (thou forum archiving will invalidate link in future)
Question: lens has 58mm thread. The Marumi +3 looks really thick, does it cause vignetting if I buy 58mm? If it does, which size I have to buy?
DavidBM wrote:
The Raynox is a LOT bigger, so unless you already have it if you are getting results you like with the Marumi it may not be worth it. The +2 component isn’t huge, though it is 72mm, but then it’s two element so is unlikely to be better than any other good two element job. The +3 is great, but very big, and together to give a five element +5 it’s massive though very good. Good coatings too.
As for the 0.75 strength, I think there’s some difference going from having the lens set around 1-1.3m to around 5m, though I agree it’s not dramatic like it is with closer distances....Show more →
I'm getting the Marumi 3+ achromat (58mm) in a few days and will report back.
Parariss wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something, but I've avoided lens hoodies because something could press against the neoprene and rub the hoodie against the front element. Moreover, if there's any dust there it would get ground into to glass. I like neoprene for lens cases, not in lieu of lens caps, but maybe I just don't get it.
I only use them with the hood in shooting position and have never had any problems over the years. The end of the hoodie has a thicker more protective layer. Because my hoods are in shooting position there's a large gap between the end of the hoodie and front element. Dust does not work it's way through the Neoprene when the lenses are stored but I always keep my lenses in camera bags or cases. It works well for me.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Fred, thanks for summary, bookmarked... (thou forum archiving will invalidate link in future)
Question: lens has 58mm thread. The Marumi +3 looks really thick, does it cause vignetting if I buy 58mm? If it does, which size I have to buy?
Samuli
I'm getting the Marumi (3+) 58mm in a few days and will let you know ($75 at Amazon). I don't think it will cause any vignetting since it's about as long as the original hood. I've tried the Marumi 67mm (5+) with a 58-67mm step-up ring and there is zero vignetting as well. It's curious that the 67mm close-up lens actually looks proportional to the lens' barrel width.
I am mainly using the Marumi 5+ with the CV 65/2 APO for 1:1 Macro but it can also be used with the 40/1.2 for great MFD performance. The "3+" should provide slightly better range for the trouble distance range though.
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's curious that the 67mm close-up lens actually looks proportional to the lens' barrel width.
Similar as 58mm filters look in FE55 & FE35, like made for it. Last summer I used a lot Contax G21/G28 with B+W 82mm polarizer and it looks absolute ridiculous
Whoa, didn't mean to take the thread in wrong direction. I just seem to hate fiddling with the lens cap if I'm out shooting for the day. I travel like crazy and what I find is that I usually pick a lens and walk around with cap off (filter on) until inspiration strikes...or if I am at a car show or something, I will walk and shoot and not turn the camera off for an hour or so...
In three weeks I am headed to Italy for a 4 day 1000 mile vintage car race called the Mille Miglia, the sun is intense and you are shooting straight at it as cars come at you from all angles.
Wishing there were some less expensive battery options ( I normally bring like 6 batteries to this event).
Apr 23, 2018 at 03:04 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
jainbaby wrote:
A few questions, please remember I am very much still a novice:
What are you guys using for a lens filter? I'd like to add one and when walking around, not bother with the lens cap much...
Anyone add a ND filter for direct sun?
As mentioned, the included hood is great. I'm in the "almost never use filters" camp, unless to go to the beach or something. I don't even use the hood much, but the last time I went out for a day shooting around town - riding crowded subways and such - I brought it so I could leave the cap off and the camera on, and not worry about rubbing the front element up on something. No problemo.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Of course there is the Raynox which should provide even better IQ since it has more corrective elements. I have not tried this one yet just because of its size.
A very slight change of topic, but sort of fits here:
Here is an image taken with the old Zuiko 1.2/50 OM lens.
It's quite a good lens at some ranges, and better close up than I expected.
BUT
Add the +2 Raynox (and I imagine any other good +2 achromat) and it becomes a really decent lens indeed for closeish use at f1.2...
(These are at about .7 metre)
Best of five focussed images for both, tripod, etc etc...
DavidBM wrote:
A very slight change of topic, but sort of fits here:
Here is an image taken with the old Zuiko 1.2/50 OM lens.
It's quite a good lens at some ranges, and better close up than I expected.
BUT
Add the +2 Raynox (and I imagine any other good +2 achromat) and it becomes a really decent lens indeed for closeish use at f1.2...
(These are at about .7 metre)
Best of five focussed images for both, tripod, etc etc...
