I am wanting to to transition from the Cokin P resin filters to glass, most likely round filters. (if you think I should do something else let me know). I shoot 95% black and white. Is there any good reason not to do a B60 to 67mm step up ring and purchase the 67mm filters? When I go on the BH website an the proce difference between a Bay 60 and a 67mm Heliopan red filter is almost $80, I have to wonder why. Are they just sticking it to Hassy owners, a supply and demend type thing or somethint else?
Medium Format Forum
Register a free account now!
If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
Bay60 v 67mm Filter question
- Thread starter jacksav
- Start date
najobskalf
Member
It may not matter optically, but there is such a thing as the "heft" of a Hasselblad filter that makes it an object of unparalleled splendour in a true devotee's mind.
Something to consider is to use Bay 60 filters for the filter types that one switches-out on a frequent basis, and use a step-up ring and 67 mm. filters for the filter types that one uses less frequently.
Though a set-up ring/67 mm. filter combination is the cheaper alternative, the filters can be difficult to take-off if over-tightened by even a small amount -- doesn't matter if the set-up ring is one from Hasselblad or a third-party. When the latter happens one just needs to turn to step-up ring to the right until it can go no further, and the filter can 'usually' be screwed-off (easily, but not always so) at that point -- the problem is if the filter slips it may catch the front lens element and scratch it. With that in mind, going with Bayonet-type filters exclusively may well be the cheaper alternative in the long run.
FYI: the principle reason I use a step-up ring is that I have a CFi 50, and subsequently settled on 77 mm. for certain filter types that are either not available in bayonet mounts and/or I don't use that often. As such I use B70-77 and B60-77 step-up rings -- they are handy, and prevent having to have complete duplicate sets of filters in both sizes. On the downside, a corollary is that one generally needs to have a larger selection of lens hoods
(just can't win, eh)
Though a set-up ring/67 mm. filter combination is the cheaper alternative, the filters can be difficult to take-off if over-tightened by even a small amount -- doesn't matter if the set-up ring is one from Hasselblad or a third-party. When the latter happens one just needs to turn to step-up ring to the right until it can go no further, and the filter can 'usually' be screwed-off (easily, but not always so) at that point -- the problem is if the filter slips it may catch the front lens element and scratch it. With that in mind, going with Bayonet-type filters exclusively may well be the cheaper alternative in the long run.
FYI: the principle reason I use a step-up ring is that I have a CFi 50, and subsequently settled on 77 mm. for certain filter types that are either not available in bayonet mounts and/or I don't use that often. As such I use B70-77 and B60-77 step-up rings -- they are handy, and prevent having to have complete duplicate sets of filters in both sizes. On the downside, a corollary is that one generally needs to have a larger selection of lens hoods
Excellent point there Q.G. If one considers the number of hoods one would need to carry if (for instance) shooting with a 50, 80 and a 150/180 (a fairly common combination) then a Proshade would likely not be all that comparatively cumbersome. The fact that a Proshade can be adjusted easily to exactly match the focal length of a particular lens also argues well in its favour. Other practical considerations also speak in favour of the Proshade: the correspondingly larger variety and relatively low price of square filters; a single set of square filters takes up very little space; stack-caps aren't available for Bay-type filters (if one think this through this isn't as minor a concern as it seems). As such, having to purchase and carry one or more Proshade adapters is a relatively paltry concern.
With all that said, it is truly unfortunate that Hasselblad did not come-out with a Proshade model that could accept 4x6" (100x150 mm.) filters and that had a revolving face. I suspect that a significant portion of the V community would have correspondingly rejoiced and sales would have been quite significant (possibly would be today if such a a model were introduced: it is unfortunate that Hasselblad--the company--doesn't seem to recognize that the current V community has morphed into one far more diverse than its traditional clientele (which is the target now of the H series) and that a significant market for similarly novel accessories quite likely exists).
Despite all that, it actually would not hurt to have a set of commonly-used Bay-type filters and the corresponding hoods for one's lenses even if one went with a Proshade. The reason for this is that one does not always carry a full kit, and having a dedicated base set for a lens allows one to travel lightly and work quickly. Besides, used hoods and bayonet filters are commonly available and not too pricy. On that note: do beware that Bay-6 Rollei filters may not necessarily fit a 'Blad lenses (I found that out the hard way).
With all that said, it is truly unfortunate that Hasselblad did not come-out with a Proshade model that could accept 4x6" (100x150 mm.) filters and that had a revolving face. I suspect that a significant portion of the V community would have correspondingly rejoiced and sales would have been quite significant (possibly would be today if such a a model were introduced: it is unfortunate that Hasselblad--the company--doesn't seem to recognize that the current V community has morphed into one far more diverse than its traditional clientele (which is the target now of the H series) and that a significant market for similarly novel accessories quite likely exists).
Despite all that, it actually would not hurt to have a set of commonly-used Bay-type filters and the corresponding hoods for one's lenses even if one went with a Proshade. The reason for this is that one does not always carry a full kit, and having a dedicated base set for a lens allows one to travel lightly and work quickly. Besides, used hoods and bayonet filters are commonly available and not too pricy. On that note: do beware that Bay-6 Rollei filters may not necessarily fit a 'Blad lenses (I found that out the hard way).
I agree that the ProShade is utterly useless when you need to use graduated filters.
But for those of us who do not, it still is a relatively cheap and easy solution to the 'filter problem' worth considering.
It's a very effective shade too. Not quite a "dinosaur".
(The Cokin system, by the way, is made to accomodate proprietary Cokin filter sizes.
Not a big problem, if Cokin would be able to produce proper filters. Which in my experience they are not.
Bad, warped bits of plastic , "schlieren" and hazy bits not being uncommon. Yuck!)
But for those of us who do not, it still is a relatively cheap and easy solution to the 'filter problem' worth considering.
It's a very effective shade too. Not quite a "dinosaur".
(The Cokin system, by the way, is made to accomodate proprietary Cokin filter sizes.
Not a big problem, if Cokin would be able to produce proper filters. Which in my experience they are not.
Bad, warped bits of plastic , "schlieren" and hazy bits not being uncommon. Yuck!)
I want to thank you all for your helpful suggestions. I think the "inconviencienc" of the step-up and threaded filter combo will not be a problem. I don't do much "quick" shooting. I am becoming concerned about the possibility of vigneting on a 50mm with a step-up and filter (or 2). Is this a valid concern? Also, I will probably keep the cokin just for the ND grad for the ability to slide the "horizen area." Am I asking for vigneting here also?
Once again for all the suggestions.
Once again for all the suggestions.
Jack: from what I remember, the instruction sheet that came with the B70 to B60 adapter says not to use more than one filter on the ring or vignetting would be an issue. There is a chance that you may get away with using two slim filters -- I have used a 'Blad B60 polarizer (which is somewhat thicker than regular filters) on the adapter with no problems -- but slim filters tend to be almost as pricy as bayonet filters.
FYI: if you get a CFi 50 and use a B70 to 77 mm. step-up ring, consider acquiring a H series 77 mm. lens cap: filters tend to bind easily on this size adapter, and the slots in the cap provide a handy grip when twisting the combo to the right as I described previously as a means to loosen a filter from the ring. The probable reason this works well is that one isn't putting pressure on the side of the filter as one would when grasping the side of the filter: the latter causes the ring to flex slightly and thereby grasp the side of the mount even tighter. Once the filter is loosened the cap also works as a handy grip to lift the filter away --works far better than the stock bayonet lens caps in every respect.
FYI: if you get a CFi 50 and use a B70 to 77 mm. step-up ring, consider acquiring a H series 77 mm. lens cap: filters tend to bind easily on this size adapter, and the slots in the cap provide a handy grip when twisting the combo to the right as I described previously as a means to loosen a filter from the ring. The probable reason this works well is that one isn't putting pressure on the side of the filter as one would when grasping the side of the filter: the latter causes the ring to flex slightly and thereby grasp the side of the mount even tighter. Once the filter is loosened the cap also works as a handy grip to lift the filter away --works far better than the stock bayonet lens caps in every respect.