Filter question on FE 50mm f/2.8

[ken_lo]

<p>I have recently purchased a 200 series system, among which there is a FE 50mm f/2.8 lens. With the adapter/hood, the required filter size will be 93mm. As this will cost a fortune, I am wondering if it is going to work if I were to purchase or custom make a step up ring from 93mm to 95mm as I do have both 95mm UV and CPL filters from my old Contax 645 days.</p>

<p>I have read people stepping up from 93mm to 105mm but since I already have the 95mm filters, I am hopeful that my proposition will work and can save me some money. Has anyone had any similar experience?</p>

<p>Also, I would like to know if the hoods for FE 110, 150 and 250 are identical. I have both the 110 and 250 lenses and am considering to buy just one hood to fit both. Thanks in advance for all your inputs.</p>

<p>Regards,<br>

Ken</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

<p>Ken,</p>

<p>Whether a step-up ring will work depends on how 'fat' it is.<br>

The thread on the lens is 86 mm.</p>

<p>There indeed is only one bayonet 70 hood, and it is intended for all three lenses you mention. So you only need to buy one, yes.</p>

[ken_lo]

<p>Today I tried to put my 95mm over the 93mm hood, and as expected there is very limitde space between the two... The hood is already quite thick so I would be concerned if that attachment of an additional step-up ring would only create vignetting unless I apply a 105mm or bigger filter on top.</p>

<p>I guess another option is to mount a step-up ring directly over the 86mm lens thread. That will probably work, but then I will lose the function of the hood. I guess I can't get the best of both worlds unless I invest into new 93mm filters.</p>

[stuart_richardson]

<p>What filters are you looking to use? If you are just looking for a uv for protection -- don't bother. The metal shade offers pretty good protection, and paying through the nose for a 93mm filter is simply not worth it. You are probably highly unlikely to damage the lens in the first place, and if you did, a filter only provides protection in certain instances. I'd say it makes more sense just to buy the entire lens again rather than a 93mm filter -- it is probably only about 5 or 6 times more expensive....the 50mm FE lenses are anywhere from 1000-1500...if you buy new, the filters are probably 200-300 dollars. </p>

[kris]

B+W makes 86mm filters (1mm thread pitch). I bought a Kaesemann Cir-POL MRC for about $200 Australian dollar a few years ago.

<p>

<a href=http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/10892-REG/B_W_65016119_86_mm_Kaeseman_Circular.html>BH Photo</a> sells the exact same filter for US$200. <a href=http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/11996-REG/B_W_66045128_86mm_UV_Haze_010.html>The UV MRC is US$125.</a> I cannot say they are cheap but compared to the prices of 93mm or B60/B70 filters...

<p>

As for lens hood, If you hunt around, you may find the metal cylindrical lens hood for the FE 50/2.8. It is made by Hasselblad and has 2,8/50 written (engraved) on it.

[ken_lo]

<p>Stuart, you made an interesting point. Yes, the FE lenses aren't that expensive any more and it probably doesn't make any sense to spend so much money on the UV filters alone. However, I like using CPL filters a lot, especially for shots with a pond/lake/sea in them. I probably can live without the UV's, but not CPL's. And because of the outrageous costs of new ones, I am thinking of getting an step-up adapter so that I can use my 95mm Contax CPL filter.</p>

<p>Kris, thanks for your info, but as said, I probably don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on filters anymore. And for my 50/2.8, I already have the metal hood with my lens.</p>

[raymond_tai]

<p>I use a b+w 86mm filter plus a Contax metal hood II on it with no problems.</p>