Filter & hood size - 77mm, 72mm, or less?

omega leader · 01-20-2011, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by Kitty

I know pros would step up to 72mm or 77mm. I think this is because when they do wide angle lenses they need it this wide. What about for me? Right now I only own the 18-55mm kit lens. Someday I would like a telephoto zoom and some lens(es?) for macro. Wide angle, maybe that too.

The reason that "The Pros" buy 77mm filters is that the vast majority of constant "PRO" 2.8 zooms use 77mm filters, e.g. Nikon 24-70mm f2.8, Canon 24-70mm f2.8, Nikon 17-55mm f2.8, Pentax 16-50mm f2.8, Nikon 70-200mm f2.8, Canon 70-200mm f2.8, Sigma 70-200mm f2.8...I think I could go on for ages.

Now these lens are almost universally over $1000, and many are significantly more than that.

I think the cheapest lens that uses 77mm filters is the Sigma 10-20mm f4.5-5.6 and even then that is about $500-$600. As a beginner who has the kit lens and plans to get more lenses in the future I would say look seriously at the type of lenses you want.

A simple 77mm UV filter is $120, (if your going to buy one get a good one, look at my thread on the imact of low quality filters), and a CPL is up to $200 or more. This is more than the 35mm f2.5 lens.

I would say step up at most one or two sizes (i.e. get a 58mm filter), any more and you are simply wasting money.

Kitty · 01-20-2011, 08:19 PM

Yeah, I've been researching lenses a lot. So far, I want one good AF lens, and then wait and find good prices on adaptall2 lenses. Leaning toward getting fast lenses, so it wouldn't be cheap. A bunch of the AD2 lenses have 62mm threads but it looks to vary a lot.

I have to do more research on Cokin and competitors. I don't think I can go with something really big and square, but I believe they make others.

Kitty · 01-20-2011, 08:32 PM

Oh, also I am new to this. I think I would use the CPL plenty but I don't know how often I would use NDs and other filters. (So, I might get a good CPL for my most used lens or lenses.) For other filters, that sounds good to get one of the cheapest systems, that's not bad quality, to play around with. (Maybe use system CPL too.) All I know is I am frustrated with having pics where the sky is way too bright. I know there are some other ways to help avoid that, but I read how good gradient NDs are for this. From what I read, just one would work in most situations, but maybe tha's not true. Also I am curious about most other filters, but most would probably be just to experiment and not be used anymore.

cats_five · 01-21-2011, 02:16 AM

Originally posted by Kitty

I don't think I can go with something really big and square, but I believe they make others.

Why not? You have lots of us telling you they are the most cost-effective and flexible way to go. Yes, there are circular filters, but square (Cokin / Cokin-style) and circular is your lot. AFAIK Cokin don't make circular filters.

Ira · 01-21-2011, 04:35 AM

The polarizer is circular. And they keep the cost down because the machining is much simpler:

It doesn't need an extra ring and rotating mechanism. It just rotates in the holder.

As far as square versus round go, this isn't a fashion show Kitty. But you would be AMAZED at the attention my Cokin system brings me. It looks like I'm carrying a bazooka.

Kitty · 01-21-2011, 11:48 PM

I did more research and decided the Cokin P is what I want. Thanks for getting me to research that.

I also decided I would use solid NDs more than grad NDs.

Ira · 01-22-2011, 07:48 AM

Kitty, you can buy inexpensive clones off eBay of the P series holder, hood modules and various filter rings, but stick with Cokin BRAND filters.

So just buy the filters from B&H to make sure you're getting Cokin. (Many of the eBay listings are deceptively worded.)

Of course, if you can afford all Cokin branded, I would avoid eBay entirely.

Kitty · 01-22-2011, 07:51 AM

Yes, exactly my plan

Ira · 01-22-2011, 08:05 AM - **1 Like**

Also keep your eye out for Cokin's Universal Ring on eBay for a cheap price. Otherwise, I think it's really pricey. Scroll down to product 499 (in purple):

COKIN Creative System - Filters A/P/Z/X - Accessories

I don't know how this functions on an AF lens (I only shoot manual), but in the event you lose a filter ring, in a pinch, this will work on any lens. More importantly:

If you find a great old lens with a damaged filter end preventing use of filters (this is pretty common), this dramatically brings the price of that lens down. With this ring though--no problem using filters!

Kitty · 01-22-2011, 08:15 AM

Ok, good tip and thanks again.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wanted - Acquired: PH-RBL 67mm hood & PH-RBH 77mm Hood	stl09	Sold Items	0	02-14-2010 11:37 AM
For Sale - Sold: Hoya 77mm SHMC UV & Heliopan 72mm Slim UV	photobizzz	Sold Items	2	12-19-2009 01:24 PM
Bayonet lens hood for Sigma 28-200 w 72mm filter diameter?	Sodbuster	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	03-16-2009 09:43 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tiffen 72mm Haze-1 filter (US & Canada)	heatherslightbox	Sold Items	11	06-12-2008 06:49 PM

01-20-2011, 07:26 PM	#16
omega leader Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Niagara Region, Ontario Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 417	Originally posted by Kitty I know pros would step up to 72mm or 77mm. I think this is because when they do wide angle lenses they need it this wide. What about for me? Right now I only own the 18-55mm kit lens. Someday I would like a telephoto zoom and some lens(es?) for macro. Wide angle, maybe that too. The reason that "The Pros" buy 77mm filters is that the vast majority of constant "PRO" 2.8 zooms use 77mm filters, e.g. Nikon 24-70mm f2.8, Canon 24-70mm f2.8, Nikon 17-55mm f2.8, Pentax 16-50mm f2.8, Nikon 70-200mm f2.8, Canon 70-200mm f2.8, Sigma 70-200mm f2.8...I think I could go on for ages. Now these lens are almost universally over $1000, and many are significantly more than that. I think the cheapest lens that uses 77mm filters is the Sigma 10-20mm f4.5-5.6 and even then that is about $500-$600. As a beginner who has the kit lens and plans to get more lenses in the future I would say look seriously at the type of lenses you want. A simple 77mm UV filter is $120, (if your going to buy one get a good one, look at my thread on the imact of low quality filters), and a CPL is up to $200 or more. This is more than the 35mm f2.5 lens. I would say step up at most one or two sizes (i.e. get a 58mm filter), any more and you are simply wasting money.

01-20-2011, 08:19 PM	#17
Kitty Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 102 Original Poster	Yeah, I've been researching lenses a lot. So far, I want one good AF lens, and then wait and find good prices on adaptall2 lenses. Leaning toward getting fast lenses, so it wouldn't be cheap. A bunch of the AD2 lenses have 62mm threads but it looks to vary a lot. I have to do more research on Cokin and competitors. I don't think I can go with something really big and square, but I believe they make others.

01-20-2011, 08:32 PM	#18
Kitty Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 102 Original Poster	Oh, also I am new to this. I think I would use the CPL plenty but I don't know how often I would use NDs and other filters. (So, I might get a good CPL for my most used lens or lenses.) For other filters, that sounds good to get one of the cheapest systems, that's not bad quality, to play around with. (Maybe use system CPL too.) All I know is I am frustrated with having pics where the sky is way too bright. I know there are some other ways to help avoid that, but I read how good gradient NDs are for this. From what I read, just one would work in most situations, but maybe tha's not true. Also I am curious about most other filters, but most would probably be just to experiment and not be used anymore.

01-21-2011, 02:16 AM	#19
cats_five Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Fife, Scotland Posts: 835	Originally posted by Kitty I don't think I can go with something really big and square, but I believe they make others. Why not? You have lots of us telling you they are the most cost-effective and flexible way to go. Yes, there are circular filters, but square (Cokin / Cokin-style) and circular is your lot. AFAIK Cokin don't make circular filters.

01-21-2011, 04:35 AM	#20
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	The polarizer is circular. And they keep the cost down because the machining is much simpler: It doesn't need an extra ring and rotating mechanism. It just rotates in the holder. As far as square versus round go, this isn't a fashion show Kitty. But you would be AMAZED at the attention my Cokin system brings me. It looks like I'm carrying a bazooka.

01-21-2011, 11:48 PM	#21
Kitty Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 102 Original Poster	I did more research and decided the Cokin P is what I want. Thanks for getting me to research that. I also decided I would use solid NDs more than grad NDs.

01-22-2011, 07:48 AM	#22
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Kitty, you can buy inexpensive clones off eBay of the P series holder, hood modules and various filter rings, but stick with Cokin BRAND filters. So just buy the filters from B&H to make sure you're getting Cokin. (Many of the eBay listings are deceptively worded.) Of course, if you can afford all Cokin branded, I would avoid eBay entirely.

01-22-2011, 07:51 AM	#23
Kitty Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 102 Original Poster	Yes, exactly my plan

01-22-2011, 08:05 AM - 1 Like	#24
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Also keep your eye out for Cokin's Universal Ring on eBay for a cheap price. Otherwise, I think it's really pricey. Scroll down to product 499 (in purple): COKIN Creative System - Filters A/P/Z/X - Accessories I don't know how this functions on an AF lens (I only shoot manual), but in the event you lose a filter ring, in a pinch, this will work on any lens. More importantly: If you find a great old lens with a damaged filter end preventing use of filters (this is pretty common), this dramatically brings the price of that lens down. With this ring though--no problem using filters!

01-22-2011, 08:15 AM	#25
Kitty Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 102 Original Poster	Ok, good tip and thanks again.