Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-12-2014, 10:00 PM   #1
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 142
CPL for a Pentax 12-24mm?

Hi all,

Wonder if someone can advise on whether a standard unit will work with no or minimum vignetting, or is a slim unit required?

(I amazed by how much you can spend on a good 77mm job).

05-12-2014, 10:59 PM - 1 Like   #2
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,001
Good Evening (well, I guess that it's tomorrow for you down in Oz)....

Using a CPL on the 12-24 is a bit different than with other lenses. CPLs generally, do not work very well on the lens (and we are talking in particular about the sky), because its focal length. Beyond about 24mm, the lens is too wide for the polarization to really work across the entire field of view. It can certainly still be used, however the polarization effect will be concentrated in one area. If that is the effect that you are going after, then it will work just fine. In terms of removing reflections from water and other reflective surfaces, then it acts just fine. It also adds saturation to colors.

So, with that out of the way, I actually do have a CPL for my 12-24. I picked up a thin, low profile one just so that I would either not have (or mitigate as much as possible) the potential of vignetting. I picked up a Nikon PL2 77mm. It was not cheap, I think that it ran me a bit over $100 (also its the same size needed for the A* 300/f4) and that was a number of years ago. Nikon no longer sells filters - but I do have to say, this does do a stunning job. It is sufficiently thin enough that I have not experienced any vignetting with it. And, yes when used with sky shots, I do get the non uniform application of the polarization (and have felt that I ruined a few shots using it). You need to really evaluate the shot. Also, the 12-24 does do a fine job in terms of contrast and pulling the colors. Depending on the shot, having the reflection off the water can add to the image and other times detract from the image. If its a shot that you really do want, I would shoot it both with and without, so that you can decide afterwards what turned out better.

Hope that helps....


Last edited by interested_observer; 05-12-2014 at 11:16 PM.
05-13-2014, 12:48 AM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by interested_observer Quote
I picked up a Nikon PL2 77mm. It was not cheap, I think that it ran me a bit over $100 (also its the same size needed for the A* 300/f4) and that was a number of years ago.
I have 2 or 3 of the same filter (at least 2 different filter sizes) that I use and like, although I got them for a pretty good price when Ritz was closing all its stores.

I'm sure there are many other options for you, but it's a good CPL.
05-13-2014, 01:59 AM   #4
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,367
Tangent alert!!
Question was: is a slim filter required?
:-)

05-13-2014, 03:46 AM   #5
Tas
Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,001
Sigmund,

I can't say I have the 12-24, but I use a standard version 77mm CPL on my Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6. The only vignetting issue I normally have with the standard size CPL is when I want to use it in combination with slide in filters like the Cokin P series. At 10mm with the standard CPL,screw in 77mm adapter and wide angle P mount bracket (this is the slimmer version) I can see the P mount bracket in the corners of the frame. Of course the fix is simple: zoom in until you no longer see the bracket (which is normally around 11-12mm.)

I know this is a different lens, but if it's not an issue at 10mm on the Sigma, hopefully you will get the answer you're looking for soon.

Regards,

Tas

Last edited by Tas; 05-15-2014 at 12:34 PM.
05-13-2014, 03:55 AM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,001
There are a lot of filters available from a wide range of vendors. I picked up a thin mount and it works just fine. In stating that - it begs the question as to how thick a filter frame could be used and still NOT vignette. Personally, I don't know, since I only have that one filter in the 77mm size.

Let me add that there are two models the PL and the PL II. I have the PL II (thin) and have not experienced any vignetting even at 12mm. I went looking for the specifications - in order to find the frames' thickness, and found the following... This appears to be the extent of any information on the filter.This may help a bit - however it does not specify the frames thickness nor any of the overall physical dimensions (other than the 77mm filter width). The II version does appear to be substantially thinner than the original. The original starts vignetting at focal length of 35mm. That the only real information I could glean from the web.

I got up to take a couple of shots in the back yard between moon set and sun rise using the O-GPS1 (Astrotracking capability) that arrived yesterday. Then, I am going back to bed for a while, at least till its time to get up and go to work.

05-13-2014, 03:48 PM   #7
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 142
Original Poster
Many thanks for your generous responses folks.

Yes, my question was just about slimness but I've got so much more of benefit (unlike yesterday's Federal budget). Appreciate those links i_o. The optic aperture has been opened ;-)

I guess the Lee system is an option to control costs in the long run but it would be expensive up front, and I'm into landscape and bird pics with a lot of walking around so it might be a bit awkward. Step up/down adapters may be a better option. Standardising lenses to share filters makes sense where possible (so the next tele should be the DA 300!).

Seems like the price range of quality brands from reliable suppliers is $100 - $140. There's a Nikon still on the market so I'll check the flavour.

(Astro-tracking: shmick).
05-13-2014, 06:39 PM   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
This brand has high IQ and is a good value, but I don't think I've used their CPLs (only ND and UV). Looks like it might be thin enough - you could give it a try:

Super DHG

05-13-2014, 09:14 PM   #9
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 142
Original Poster
Thanks DSims. Yeah, I've read good things about Marumis so I got one second hand at Amazon. Plus a step-down ring so it will do double duty. B&W and Nikons were about double the price.

Choice is limited at the moment here in Oz and there are export barriers in the US (free trade!) so the Marumi will come via a trans-shipping service.

Last edited by Sigmund; 05-13-2014 at 09:55 PM.
05-14-2014, 12:32 AM   #10
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,001
It occurred to me that there is an answer to the original question of how thick a filter (frame) so as to not vignette on the lens. We all have one - the hood. Using the flower peddle hood, the cut back at the corners, provides the indication as to the maximum thickness you can have, that will not vignette. Staying below that point will be a good estimate of how thick a filter frame is useable.

05-14-2014, 12:55 AM   #11
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 142
Original Poster
Good thinking Batman.

Assuming the factory design was empirically sound.
05-15-2014, 04:48 AM   #12
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 142
Original Poster
For info - LensTip's comparative test: Polarizing filters test - Results and summary - Lenstip.com
05-15-2014, 05:08 AM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter
GlassJunkie's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: St Petersburg
Photos: Albums
Posts: 327
I ran a real life test for you in my "lab" (a high contrast surface in crappy lighting- office closet doors) where I tested the same a year ago. The first image is a DA12-24 with a 77 B+W KSM MRC nano (and hood which shouldn't matter or change anyway). No problem, use the same CPL on the 16-50 DA* 2.8. Second image is my everyday protector a NISI LR Gold UV (very thin). No problem either. Interchange it with a B+W MRC Nano 77 UV depending on what I am fumbling around with in the field. Hope these help... BTW the shadow in the lower right is my shoulder. "Lab Error"
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3  Photo 
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, unit
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax 12-24mm vs Sigma 12-24mm & Tamron 10-24mm Comparative Review Adam Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 03-23-2012 03:07 PM
A test of 3 ultrawides - DA 12-24mm, Sigma 12-24mm (FF) and Samyang 14mm (FF) DanielT74 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 04-19-2011 11:35 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA 12-24mm F/4 with Tiffen filter set (includes CPL) (Worldwide) Marc Langille Sold Items 10 11-17-2010 08:52 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:31 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top