Has anyone replaced their drop-in filter on 400/600GM?

ChrisMak
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Has anyone replaced their drop-in filter on 400/600GM?

arbitrage wrote:
Yes, according to the user manual for the lenses the clear filter is part of the optics and shouldn't be used without.

Interesting fact...the new Nikon 800PF has a drop in but it doesn't come with a clear filter in place. It is designed without the glass but you can add a CP.

Good move by Nikon!
That way, only when using a CPL, there is a small sacrifice to IQ, but the 99,9 % of usage this lens will see no doubt, will be optimal.
i applaud Nikon for taking this approach and hope others will too. Although even better is a fully sealed lens without drop-in filter. Because seriously, who ever truly uses a CPL on a 600mm lens, and feels he cannot do without?

Edited on May 15, 2022 at 08:03 AM · View previous versions

May 15, 2022 at 02:23 AM

ChrisMak
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Has anyone replaced their drop-in filter on 400/600GM?

DavidBM wrote:
Not a good idea, I think. These long tele lenses are calculated with a flat element in the image path, whose refraction is taken into account. Removing it will give you induced field curvature and possibly a little outer field astigmatism. This is the reason there is a clear/UV filter there is the first place. They want you to be able to use a polariser or ND filter, but if they calculate the lens with a filter, then shipping it without one will be problematic. If they calculate the lens without a filter, then using a pol or ND will...Show more →

Yes, I am well aware of the theoretical downsides of removinng the flat piece of glass from an optical path designed to have it there. The point of focus shifts slightly so I believe the blue red and green light rays don'align as intended either anymore, leading to chrometic abberation.
I am not saying it is best to remove the filter from a theoretical point of view, but here are some alternative thoughts:

-flat pieces of glass are far more critical when it comes to light passing through them then the actual curved lens elements, which are far easier for light rays to pass through. An optical path without a flat piece of glass is more optimal.
-flat "neutral" filters are never truly neutral. I once decided to do a test with three filters, a Nikon filter, a sigma filter and a B&W filter. They all added their own particular color cast, the Sigma being positively warm, the B&W being slightly greyish, and the Nikon most neutral. The color cast changed the actual colors slightly as well.
-on low res FF cameras, for which the whole drop-in filter concept was designed, you see no difference in fine detail, but with a high resolution camera like the Canon 7DII, the improvement in fine detail by removing the stock filter was remarkable.
-super telephoto lenses use exotic glass elements, but the drop in filter is in all cases a generic consumer piece of glass from the standard filter range. The quality can vary substantially.
-the practical impact of leaving out the filter varies, and the question is whether this impact is worse than the inevitable impact of putting a flat piece of fairly ordinary multicoated glass in the optical path.

May 15, 2022 at 02:43 AM

DavidBM
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Has anyone replaced their drop-in filter on 400/600GM?

ChrisMak wrote:
Yes, I am well aware of the theoretical downsides of removinng the flat piece of glass from an optical path designed to have it there. The point of focus shifts slightly so I believe the blue red and green light rays don'align as intended either anymore, leading to chrometic abberation.
I am not saying it is best to remove the filter from a theoretical point of view, but here are some alternative thoughts:

-flat pieces of glass are far more critical when it comes to light passing through them then the actual curved lens elements, which are far easier for light rays...Show more →

It really doesn’t matter whether glass is exotic or not unless you need the particular dispersion or refraction characteristics of the exotic glass in your design. If the optical design assumes a piece of (flat, yes that matters) crown or ordinary optical glass and takes into account its particular features, then replacing that with fluorite, LD glass, HD glass, APD glass or indeed air, will make things worse not better.

May 15, 2022 at 05:38 AM

Douglas L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Has anyone replaced their drop-in filter on 400/600GM?

Douglas L wrote:
Well, about 4 or 5 months after getting the 600 GM NIB, I pulled out the filter to have a look, the filter was covered wth grease like substance. I had never touched it by accident or anything. I was shocked by Sony's sloppy QC for such an expensive lens. I cleaned it up. But I also ordered a replacement directly from Sony, SKU: VF405MP, same one in the BH link you showed.

On Sony's 600 GM page, it's listed at accessary .https://electronics.sony.com/imaging/lenses/all-e-mount/p/sel600f40.

Now, here is the fun part, the original filter that came with the lens has a slightly taller frame,...Show more →

Update: Sony replied to my question. The Sony Zeiss T* MC Protector 40.5mm VF-405MP is fully compatible with the 600 GM. But it's not the same one that came with my lens.

May 15, 2022 at 07:21 AM

kimknapp
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Has anyone replaced their drop-in filter on 400/600GM?

Funny, I totally forgot that it came with a clear glass element. When I took it out this morning, I found that it is much easier cleaning it outside the lens than through the mount opening.

As far as a circular polarizer goes, there have been a couple times I wish I had it. Yesterday I was trying to photograph an Anhinga eating a very large fish, but the lighting was making it pretty much impossible.

May 15, 2022 at 09:39 AM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Sony Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end