When shooting outdoor sporting events I've started using clear filters on my Lenses to protect my investment.
The front of my Canon 400 2.8L is threaded like any other canon lens I've used but I haven't been able to find anyone who sells a clear filter for lens protection that would fit on it...Does anyone know if there is one out there?
My Nikon 400/2.8 and 500/4 have a protective piece of glass built-in. If it breaks, it's a low cost replacement procedure. I would expect the Canon has the same design. Why don't you give CPS a call.
FYI, use a filter over your lenses with caution. A baseball strike, or similar event, could cause the broken filter glass to scratch the front element.
DarkSlide wrote: My Nikon 400/2.8 and 500/4 have a protective piece of glass built-in. If it breaks, it's a low cost replacement procedure. I would expect the Canon has the same design. Why don't you give CPS a call.
FYI, use a filter over your lenses with caution. A baseball strike, or similar event, could cause the broken filter glass to scratch the front element.
That would certainly explain the threads...I'll look into that. Thanks for the info...
I shoot mostly football so it's really more wind driven dirt or debris I'm worried about...But I'll keep that in mind if I ever shoot hockey or baseball.
Frank Stephens III wrote: When shooting outdoor sporting events I've started using clear filters on my Lenses to protect my investment.
The front of my Canon 400 2.8L is threaded like any other canon lens I've used but I haven't been able to find anyone who sells a clear filter for lens protection that would fit on it...Does anyone know if there is one out there?
Frank Stephens III wrote: That would certainly explain the threads...I'll look into that. Thanks for the info...
I shoot mostly football so it's really more wind driven dirt or debris I'm worried about...But I'll keep that in mind if I ever shoot hockey or baseball.
Your lens is weather and dust sealed. Invest in a raincoat from Hoodman or ThinkTank.
Next game you're at, ask the shooters from AP, SI, Getty, NFL, GameDay and the Inquirer about lens protection. Also, have you joined SportShooters? Good forums there with full-time shooters from major news organizations.
Also a good resource for PhotoMechanic code replacement.
Frank Stephens III wrote: When shooting outdoor sporting events I've started using clear filters on my Lenses to protect my investment.
The front of my Canon 400 2.8L is threaded like any other canon lens I've used but I haven't been able to find anyone who sells a clear filter for lens protection that would fit on it...Does anyone know if there is one out there?
Those lenses are extremely tough. As somebody noted, they have the clear filter built in. Just use the hood and you'll have nothing to worry about. If you're still worried, leave it at home.
Your lens is weather and dust sealed. Invest in a raincoat from Hoodman or ThinkTank.
Next game you're at, ask the shooters from AP, SI, Getty, NFL, GameDay and the Inquirer about lens protection. Also, have you joined SportShooters? Good forums there with full-time shooters from major news organizations.
Also a good resource for PhotoMechanic code replacement.
A raincoat is on the list too... So far I've only been shooting for my portfolio so up untill now I've had the option of only shooting when the weather was nice, but that's starting to change.
I'm starting to do paid shoots for a local university and my portfolio is currently under review with one of the major press agencies.
I haven't joined sportsshooter.com yet I need to look into that....Thanks again!
Those lenses are extremely tough. As somebody noted, they have the clear filter built in. Just use the hood and you'll have nothing to worry about. If you're still worried, leave it at home.
Shss, OP only wants to hear about clear filters, not alternative sensible suggestions. He spanked me for daring to offer one earlier.
photoimager
Posts: 4,111
Stoke-on-Trent, England, United Kingdom
DarkSlide wrote: My Nikon 400/2.8 and 500/4 have a protective piece of glass built-in. If it breaks, it's a low cost replacement procedure. I would expect the Canon has the same design. Why don't you give CPS a call.
photoimager
Posts: 4,111
Stoke-on-Trent, England, United Kingdom
Drew Smith Photography wrote: Why not a good (non-rubber) lens hood?
Drew Smith Photography wrote: Shss, OP only wants to hear about clear filters, not alternative sensible suggestions. He spanked me for daring to offer one earlier.
I'd like to see you being able to source a rubber lens hood that would fit, I think it is a 155mm thread size on that lens.
DarkSlide wrote: Your lens is weather and dust sealed. Invest in a raincoat from Hoodman or ThinkTank.
Aquatech also makes a good "Sports Shield" rain/dust cover and for a large number of lenses. Have not used the other products mentioned. (see SportsShooter.com)
I haven't joined sportsshooter.com yet I need to look into that....Thanks again!
Start lurking today at SportsShooter.com lots of good information regarding equipment and shooting for schools, wire services, etc.
Frank Stephens III wrote: When shooting outdoor sporting events I've started using clear filters on my Lenses to protect my investment.
The front of my Canon 400 2.8L is threaded like any other canon lens I've used but I haven't been able to find anyone who sells a clear filter for lens protection that would fit on it...Does anyone know if there is one out there?
I have the Nikon 400 2.8, the lens hood provides all the protection you need. Clear filters provide no protection what-so-ever...
I shoot car racing and if you've ever been on a race track, especially an Oval you'll find those little rubber balls on the sides of the track from the tires. I've been hit with them and my lenses have taken direct hits and never had a problem...
Michael Fryd
Posts: 2,783
Miami Beach, Florida, US
Frank Stephens III wrote: When shooting outdoor sporting events I've started using clear filters on my Lenses to protect my investment.
The front of my Canon 400 2.8L is threaded like any other canon lens I've used but I haven't been able to find anyone who sells a clear filter for lens protection that would fit on it...Does anyone know if there is one out there?
Good news.
The Canon 400 f/2.8 L has a built-in protective element.
It's easy to miss as it's a curved meniscus lens.
According to Canon, a flat filter in front of a lens like the 400 f/2.8 L should be avoided as they can cause all sorts of image problems.
There's a good discussion of the this in Canon's "Lens Work" book, page 133-134.
My suggestion is that you give serious consideration to the recommendations from the people who designed and built your lens.
The Canon 400mm f/2.8 there is not any filter except rear if my memory serves me right it has been a few years since I last shot Canon. The best protection is the lens hood it is also the piece that gets broken the most. It is a piece that has the most gaffer tape on the NFL field. If you are worried about the elements you can buy a rain coat for it.
I always used glad trash bags and duct tape for the rain.
fullmetalphotographer wrote: The Canon 400mm f/2.8 there is not any filter except rear if my memory serves me right it has been a few years since I last shot Canon. The best protection is the lens hood it is also the piece that gets broken the most. It is a piece that has the most gaffer tape on the NFL field. If you are worried about the elements you can buy a rain coat for it.
I always used glad trash bags and duct tape for the rain.
I actually do keep a trash bad in my Think Tank belt...Just in case
The hood is big enough for certain protection. Though it's very expensive to replace (why did the made it from carbon and not normal plastic)
The frontelement of the lens is straight and doesn't have any curves to reshape the image through the complete lens. The frontellement is not a 'piece' of the combination of lenses. It's not curved for a reason. Because, when your frontelement gets broken, for what reason, it's not so expensive to replace. That's because the glas of the first element is not so expensive. It will probably still cost you a couple of hundred dollars, but not 500 or more
It will probably be not much more expensive than a goog filter of that size will cost you (if you can find one)
I've done the trash bag thing, royal pita! The Aquatech covers are nice but way overpriced... I have 2 of these, 1 fits my 70-200 + body the other covers my 400 + body. I've used them for the Rolex series and they have worked very well.... http://stormjacket.com/SJ1.html
Fotojeroen wrote: The hood is big enough for certain protection. Though it's very expensive to replace (why did the made it from carbon and not normal plastic)
The frontelement of the lens is straight and doesn't have any curves to reshape the image through the complete lens. The frontellement is not a 'piece' of the combination of lenses. It's not curved for a reason. Because, when your frontelement gets broken, for what reason, it's not so expensive to replace. That's because the glas of the first element is not so expensive. It will probably still cost you a couple of hundred dollars, but not 500 or more
It will probably be not much more expensive than a goog filter of that size will cost you (if you can find one)
That's a good point! I never thought of that...Thanks!
DITTO
Those lenses are extremely tough. As somebody noted, they have the clear filter built in. Just use the hood and you'll have nothing to worry about. If you're still worried, leave it at home.
any outdoor shooting is going to appear more natural with either a skylight or UV filter in place.... and using some kind of lens shade isn't really going to protect the lens much, but it certainly will cut down on flare and glare, so i use both a filter and a lens shade...
but neither of these devices are major lens protectors - that is what insurance is for!
bruce blosser wrote: any outdoor shooting is going to appear more natural with either a skylight or UV filter in place.... and using some kind of lens shade isn't really going to protect the lens much, but it certainly will cut down on flare and glare, so i use both a filter and a lens shade...
but neither of these devices are major lens protectors - that is what insurance is for!
Only with film, digital has UV protection built in...
bruce blosser wrote: any outdoor shooting is going to appear more natural with either a skylight or UV filter in place.... and using some kind of lens shade isn't really going to protect the lens much, but it certainly will cut down on flare and glare, so i use both a filter and a lens shade...
but neither of these devices are major lens protectors - that is what insurance is for!
Only with film, digital has UV protection built in...
Only with film, digital has UV protection built in...
everyone keeps saying that - but all i have found is that digital sensors appear to be unsensitive to the high end of UV but are sensitive to the low end of UV, approx 380 to 400angstrom and from what i have been able to gather, that sensitivity is more than enough to cause the typical scatter and haze that is visible in film shots, without a UV filter
everyone keeps saying that - but all i have found is that digital sensors appear to be unsensitive to the high end of UV but are sensitive to the low end of UV, approx 380 to 400angstrom and from i have been able to gather, that sensitivity is more than enough to cause the typical scatter and haze that is visible in film shots, without a UV filter
Moot point at least with the Nikons because there is a UV filter built into the lens in the rear, when I switch to my CP I have to remove the drop in UV...
ACPhotography wrote: Moot point at least with the Nikons because there is a UV filter built into the lens in the rear, when I switch to my CP I have to remove the drop in UV...
Michael Fryd
Posts: 2,783
Miami Beach, Florida, US
bruce blosser wrote:
where is this filter? and how do i "drop it out?"
what nikon lens(es) are you talking about?
I'm not sure about Nikon, but according to Canon's "Lens Work" book:
All EF lenses are coated to original standards which are even
stricter than the CCI (Colour Contribution Index) tolerance
range set by the ISO (International Organization for
Standardization). This coating process is called Super Spectra
Coating within Canon, and offers features such as high
transmittance, ultraviolet ray filtering, highly durable surface
hardness and stable characteristics.
Thus UV filtering is not needed with Canon lenses like the OP's Canon 400mm f/2.8.
Canon's Lens Work book is primarily a catalog of the Canon Lens lineup, but it also contains sections on lens technology. Particularly interesting are the sections on filter induced lens flare, and the challenges faced when adding an additional element to the optical path.
bruce blosser wrote: where is this filter? and how do i "drop it out?"
what nikon lens(es) are you talking about?
I'm not sure about Nikon, but according to Canon's "Lens Work" book:
Thus UV filtering is not needed with Canon lenses like the OP's Canon 400mm f/2.8.
Canon's Lens Work book is primarily a catalog of the Canon Lens lineup, but it also contains sections on lens technology. Particularly interesting are the sections on filter induced lens flare, and the challenges faced when adding an additional element to the optical path.
See, I'm not sure about Canon but the drop in filter that comes with the Nikon is a UV filter. I have a drop in CP also that I use here and there...
| 
| 
| edu