I am one of those people who likes to use a protective filter on my lenses, especially for a lens with a hood that doesn't offer much protection, like the RF 15-35. So, do I need an ultra-thin filter (vs. regular thickness) for my 15-35 in order to avoid seeing the filter frame in the picture at 15mm? I really like B+W (clear) filters but they don't make ultra-thin.
Solved! Go to Solution.
I have a clear filter on my 15-35, I use standard Bower, Tiffen or B&W. I don't see any frame at 15mm. 👍
Bay Area - CA
~R5 C (184.108.40.206) ~RF Trinity, ~RF 100~400, +Canon Control Ring~6D2 (v1.1.1) Retiring ~EF Trinity, others ~DxO PhotoLab Elite ~Windows10/11 Pro ~EVGA RTX 3080Ti FTW3 Ultra ~ImageClass MF644Cdw ~Pixel6 ~CarePaks Are Worth It
I think you're fine for the 15-35. I have that lens, with a Freewell magnetic filter holder. I stacked a CPL AND an ND on there (which isn't even a real combination), and on the R5, in stills mode, using the full sensor, got no vignetting at F/2.8 or F/22. In fact sticking my finger in from the edge of the lens, there even seemed to be a decent bit of spare room.
Other lenses may vary, though.
Thank you all for your quick and helpful responses! I'll go ahead and order my usual type of filter.
Do not order a UV filter. There is a UV filter layer built into the image sensor assembly.
I use B+W Clear Nano filters to keep my front element clean, not for protection against impacts.
Thanks for the heads-up. I stopped using UV filters several years ago, switching to the clear ones. I also prefer those B+W Clear Nano filters, which is what I ordered this morning from Adorama. They are very nice. My only lens that I can't put a protective filter on is my EF 8-15mm fisheye. So, I'm extremely careful about what I expose it to and always replace the cap after each shot.