Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: hoya ultra thin HMC or Super HMC pro1  (Read 3254 times)
boku
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493



WWW
« on: August 14, 2005, 06:57:01 AM »
ReplyReply

The 17-40 on your 1.6 crop camera can withstand a standard thickness polarizer without vignetting at any aperture. You may be paying a premium and sacrificing durability for no good reason.
Logged

Bob Kulon

Oh, one more thing...
Play it Straight and Play it True, my Brother.
boku
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 14, 2005, 08:47:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hey! Who said anything about polarizers?
Yeah, good point. So is this a UV, Polarizer, or what? I still go with my original position. Thin is not needed in these circumstances.
Logged

Bob Kulon

Oh, one more thing...
Play it Straight and Play it True, my Brother.
irev210
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2005, 01:48:55 PM »
ReplyReply

I am just looking at UV and polarizers.

So can you recommend a less expensive filter?  It is good to know I dont need to spend $50 on a 3mm thick filter.
Logged
matt4626
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 187


« Reply #3 on: August 21, 2005, 02:32:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I believe all the "Pro" thin filters have front threads. The ultra thins do not.
Logged
irev210
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2005, 03:12:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Hey, first time poster here...

I dont know if I should get the Hoya Ultra Thin HMC or the Super HMC pro1.  They are both 3mm thick.  I am using this on my new 17-40mm f/4 L lens.


Didnt seem to be able to find any information.  This is my first big lens purchase and I spent months thinking if I wanted 10-22 or the 17-40mm, even though I only have a 350D, I decided to pop for the 17-40mm even with the 1.6 crop.


If there is another filter that I should be looking at, let me know.

I just dont want to get something too thick.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8845


« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2005, 08:33:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Hey! Who said anything about polarizers?
Logged
Evan
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #6 on: August 14, 2005, 10:01:38 AM »
ReplyReply

I didn't like the thin ones because the one I bought didn't have threads on the front for the lens cap and it was harder to handle without getting your fingers on the glass.
Logged
irev210
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2005, 04:25:20 AM »
ReplyReply

well, i decided to go with the Pro1 just incase I go with a full frame in a few years.


I've been doing a lot of research, and some shooting.  The 10-22mm or 17-40 was such a tough call.

The 17-40 replaced the 18-55 that came with my camera, so I guess it worked out.
Logged
Khurram
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454


« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2005, 04:38:25 PM »
ReplyReply

the Pro 1's do have front threads, but i've found that lens caps generally don't stay on too well with the Pro1 filter.  
the other negative about them is that the build quality isn't that great (compared to B+W or Heliopan).

My Pro1 polarizer popped out of it's frame (the glass portion seperated from the rotating ring) when i dropped it.

Having said that, ive still stuck with the Pro1 filters for my 16-35mm lens because none of the alternatives have front threads (I REALLY wish that Singh-Ray would put threads on their thin mount filters)
Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad