Marc Adamus Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
OK, so all of you probably realize by now the new Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 G is the best performing ultra-wide zoom ever made. Most of you have also probably heard that this lens can now be adapted to fit many Canon bodies, including the 1Ds3, which I presently use.
For as long as I've owned Canon I've cursed their ultra-wide lens selection, including the 16-35 f/2.8 II, which I now have as my primary zoom. Once I heard the Nikon could be adapted to fit the 1Ds3, I figured that might be the solution I've been waiting for except for one MAJOR problem - filters. The 14-24, as I'm sure you're aware, is wholely incompatable with any filters - no ring mount or gelatin slots.
I'm not giving up though. The 14-24 is practically useless to me if I can't even get a polarizer on there. So I started thinking of solutions.... I hand hold my graduated filters in front of my lens at the present time.....hmmmm....so why wouldn't I be able to hand-hold an extra large grad, say 100mm+ (the lens is 98mm at the front element) in front of the bulbous front element? Obviously, if the flat grad (or a polarizer of similar size for that matter) has to be held, say, 20mm in front of the lens' front element, then such things as reflections might be a problem in some situations where light is behind the photographer, but I just can't see any reason why this would be prohibitive in all situations.
It seems to me, without doing any testing at all on the subject, that if one was to acquire large enough filters to hold in front of the lens the problem of having no front filter mount and a bulbous front element could be averted. So what am I missing? That's what I'm asking here: Why else would this not work?
|