For what it's worth, I managed to figure out a way of getting filters on my Sigma 12-24 - the only ones large enough were the Cokin X-Pro filters and that was only just large enough. I estimated that a polariser for that would need to be around the size of a dinner plate - and cost more than the full dinner service :-(
The biggest problem I found, apart from getting the mounting rails to not show in the images, was reflections off the rear of the filter down into the lens. I had to add a couple of sheets of black plastic fitting under the filter and sloping back to fit around the outside of the lens.
AGeoJO wrote:
Why are we so obsessed in being able to mount a filter over this lens ? It is me or do you guys like blotchy skies from a polarizer? I understand the need for graduate filters from time to time but now it can be done using LR.... Maybe I like the convenience of a "software" graduate filter . Those resins filters scratch too easily, too. Like always, YMMV.
1) Polarizer for actual reflection. I do'nt use polarizers as color enhancers with digital.
2) Grad ND for video. I do prefer digital blending for stills, however.
3) ND filters for video is a fundamental requirement. (Shutter speed target is 1/60)
Indeed to remove reflection off non-metalic surfaces is one of the properties of PL filter but whether you like it or not, color enhancing will take place. Generally, I like saturated colors but it is blotchy sky due to the ultra-wide nature of this lens or any other ultra wides is what I don't like. As we all know, video is a new feature on still digital SLRs and I am not sure about using the Nikkor 14-24mm on a Canon body with the necessary adapter for this purpose. Yes, I do see the need of using filters on the video mode of DSLRs unlike the possibility of PP work/digital blending of stills.
Looks like it costs $221 and has the following requirement listed on Mark's website:
"For those who find the concept of rotating the lens in its adaptor too unconenventional, the Lever-Operated version locks the lens and adaptor into fixed positions and actuates the diaphragm via a control ring installed inside the adaptor. A control switch mounted on the outside perimeter of the adaptor permits any aperture to be selected. Please note that the Nikon 14-24mm rear mount weatherproofing gasket must be modified or removed to accommodate the new aperture ring."
For right now I think I will stay with the lever-less version for my 14-24G.
Mark, I would still like to see some pictures of this new lever adapter as I need something simialar to control the aperture lever on the Sony SAL 135 f1.8Z lens which I hope to convert to work on a 1ds3.
When I say 'modify', for mine, I just yanked the gasket right out and it mates nice and tight to the adaptor. If you were concerned about it, you can just run a scalpel around the gasket and remove the excess, which will keep the joint between the adaptor and lens weatherproof. The issue of weatherproofing and adaptors is moot anyway: no adaptor has gaskets in it! I'll be posting some pictures and further details early in the new year.
Which one? I'm not sure there would be a big market for a very expensive adapted manual focus 135/1.8 even if an adaptor was doable. A proper conversion would be ideal conurus subject matter, of course . . .
mark,
Since sony 135mm f1.8 has register length difference from canon of .5mm it would have to be a conversion and not an adapter. But unless Conurus could do a complete conversion, I would need some manual mechanical way to adjust the aperture lever inside the lens mount simialar to the nikon G mount.
I know some people would say why bother since the canon 135 is a sharp lens but it seems to me that the sony-zeiss is sharper wide open and has nice bokeh, coupled with the usual zeiss drawing style that we like here. This lens is one of the jewel lenses in the sony lineup so I guess that adds to the thrill of poaching it for my 1ds3.
Yes, this lens is already -$450 more than the canon, so it is pricey.
Maybe all my recent Rokkor 58 conversions and my hubsand G-mount 14-24 enjoyment has gone to my head.
I have no complaints with my G-EOS Mark 1 adapter :-)
Especially when engaged in methodical tripod shooting.
But I did notice that while shooting a fast-paced, indoor, dimly-lit
corporate Xmas party, hand-held...it was possible for the aperture setting to end up elsewhere than where I thought it was. I think that between grabbing the barrel to manual focus and to change the focal length...it was easy to inadvertently move the aperture setting...since all three are adjusted by rotating the barrel of the lens. I think that it is also possible that due to the size and weight of the 14-24G on my 5D2 body...the aperture setting may have moved at times just from the rig being constantly moved around or slightly bumped.
I think that a PJ might have some issues in similar conditions.
So, now that I have shot this combo under those conditions, I do wish that the aperture ring had positive click indents, so that I could be confident that once an f-stop was selected - it would stay that way.
Maybe the lever style adapter solves that problem. If so, I might upgrade to that adapter for that reason alone. Again, for methodical tripod shooting, it's a non-issue.
Cheers,
Scott
PS: Mark, any plans to adapt the 14-24G to the Sony body? Is it possible?
PPS: I have a LEE FK100 filter adapter arriving tomorrow, so I can start tinkering around with ways to stick it on the 14-24G as simply and elegantly as possible :-)
MERRY XMAS ALL YOU FOLKS LEADING ALTERNATIVE GEARSTYLES !! :-)
(And all you straight Canon/Nikon folks too)
I seriously considering getting an Alpha body to use the 135mm f1.8 and 500mm mirror lens.
Would prefer to adapt these 2 lenses to EF mount instead of having different bodies.
I remember seeing that Cogitech adapted a used Minolta 500mm mirror lens for EOS.
Of course I want to convert the 135 1.8.
I guess I need to buy one and then take a look at the mount to see how to convert it.
For wandering I leave the lens at 2.8, Tv mode at 1/30 or 1/60, auto ISO. It's pretty much a point and shoot.
I wouldn't want the adapter for other lenses - 135/1.8 no way. But for how I and most people use an ultrawide zoom its not inconvenient at all.
Maybe Zeiss will build us a 135 1.8 if we ask nicely.
? It is me or do you guys like blotchy skies from a polarizer? I understand the need for graduate filters from time to time but now it can be done using LR.... Maybe I like the convenience of a "software" graduate filter 
. Those resins filters scratch too easily, too. Like always, YMMV.