# Vignetting test with new EF 16-35 F/4L IS and Lee Filter Holder



## ahsanford (Jun 28, 2014)

Landscape folks, 

I just ran a quick vignetting test with a new 16-35 F/4L IS with Lee Filter setup attached just now.

Method:


Used a FF rig, a 5D3 in my case.
Shot at F/9 perhaps 18" away from a large white wall. Confirmed focus once at beginning of series and then switched to MF for all shots so the lens wouldn't hunt on the bare white wall.
Used a Lee 77 wide angle adaptor ring directly on the lens' filter threads
Attached a 2-slot Foundation Kit holder with the 105mm CPL ring screwed on the front.
Ran a series with nothing in the Holder, and then ran it again with the 105 CPL attached.
Walked the FL from 16-24 in small manual increments (the gap in the ring is relatively small in between 16 - 20 and 20 - 24, so it was not an exact science.)
Cable release, tripod, LV, etc.
The CPL was a 105mm B+W Kaesemann filter (BWKCPMC105 at B&H)
The camera did not have peripheral illumination enabled, but I don't think it would have mattered as (a) there is no lens profile recognized by my 5D3 and (b) the type of vignetting this issue creates is a black and white hard obstruction. 
Pulled Focal Length value from the EXIF from a Mac OS Command-I (info) pull. No idea if there is a more exact way to get the value.

Results with the CPL ring on a two-slot Lee holder *but NO CPL in place:*

16mm - 24mm: Clean. No vignetting. 

Results with the CPL ring on a two-slot Lee holder *and the CPL was in place:*

16mm: Vignettes considerably. Expected.
17mm: Vignettes.
18mm: Vignettes slightly. Cloning/editing this out is only a small chore at this point.
19mm: Vignettes the smallest possible amount. A trivial fix in PS or whatever you use.
20mm - 24mm: Clean. No vignetting.

Pleasantly surprised. I thought I'd need to painstakingly disassemble my Holder down to a 'two options' variety (one slot with CPL, two slots with no CPL ring, etc.) to use this holder at all with the 16-35. But as my holder stands, I can shoot with 2 slots (no CPL) at 16mm and all three starting at 20mm. I love it. 

That the only wildcards here that might differ on your FF rig with this lens are (definitely) the thickness of your CPL's front ring and (possibly) the version of your Lee Holder. Lee is known to have snuck in weird versions over the years that are ever-so-slightly different.

Hope this is helpful to you!

- A


----------



## JustMeOregon (Jun 28, 2014)

Thanks for the great info! Saved me the trouble when I get my f/4 next week! All-in-all the f/4 looks to be a tad more forgiving (when coupled with a Lee filter holder) as compared to the f/2.8.


----------



## Otter (Jun 28, 2014)

Thanks so much for the info! I have a 2 slot holder as well as a circular polarizer and was looking into getting this lens. Is it better then the 2.8 in terms of vingnetting?


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 29, 2014)

Otter said:


> Thanks so much for the info! I have a 2 slot holder as well as a circular polarizer and was looking into getting this lens. Is it better then the 2.8 in terms of vingnetting?



I don't have the 2.8, so I couldn't say. 

My test was principally to address how much plastic/ring/leading edge physical crap Canon put in front of the front element at 16mm that would push the entire Lee holder too far 'out' from the 16mm FOV. The answer is: not much, and I'm grateful for that.

- A


----------



## Otter (Jun 30, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Otter said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks so much for the info! I have a 2 slot holder as well as a circular polarizer and was looking into getting this lens. Is it better then the 2.8 in terms of vingnetting?
> ...



Great to know, thanks again. Vingnetting has always been a pain for me. I currently have the 16-35mm I(I will pick the F/4L when I can sell my 2.8 I) and with the Lee holder and 2 slots it definitely vignettes at 16mm pretty badly, so canon must of improved something somewhere, seeing you get 2 slots and no vignetting at 16mm. This is pretty exciting to me! I have ordered the wide version of the B+W 105mm polarizer, so it will be interesting to see where what that vingettes at as well.


----------



## Spooky (Jun 30, 2014)

Just to add, I bought a 105 - 77 step up ring and have successfully used this directly on the lens with the Lee polariser with no vignetting at 16mm. Just need to be careful to avoid banding of a blue sky...


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 30, 2014)

Spooky said:


> Just to add, I bought a 105 - 77 step up ring and have successfully used this directly on the lens with the Lee polariser with no vignetting at 16mm. Just need to be careful to avoid banding of a blue sky...



Agree. If I am using a CPL for a wide angle shot, I'm only using it for reflections and water, not for darkening a blue sky. I hate that field of view related CPL darkening.

- A


----------



## NancyP (Jun 30, 2014)

Thanks for the information.


----------



## dppaskewitz (Jul 1, 2014)

This is very helpful. I'm still using the 17-40 but hope to migrate to the 16-35 f/4 shortly. I've been in the process of trying to figure out the Lee holder/CPL/UWA conundrum. Next step: order the 105 ring and the B&W CPL. Thanks.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 1, 2014)

dppaskewitz said:


> This is very helpful. I'm still using the 17-40 but hope to migrate to the 16-35 f/4 shortly. I've been in the process of trying to figure out the Lee holder/CPL/UWA conundrum. Next step: order the 105 ring and the B&W CPL. Thanks.


Before you pull the trigger on the 105 CPL, you should consider the wonderpana system:
http://www.wonderpana.com/

I haven't used it, but it's basically a Lee-style system with _much_ larger filters so that the vignetting problem is a non-issue for UWA focal lengths. If you want to stack stuff and have a CPL at 16mm, this is the system you should look into.

That said, I love my Lee setup. It's well built and has industry standard sizing so I am not married to first party 4x6 filters or CPLs. And it's flexible and powerful. I can double my ND grads on harsh sunlight, stack an ND grad with a 10 stop ND, and now with a front ring the CPL is an independent consideration if I need to manage the sky (only for longer FL) or reflections (at any FL). The only time I need to juggle/think is between 16-20mm, and that's fine by me.

- A


----------



## dppaskewitz (Jul 1, 2014)

Before you pull the trigger on the 105 CPL, you should consider the wonderpana system:
http://www.wonderpana.com/

I haven't used it, but it's basically a Lee-style system with _much_ larger filters so that the vignetting problem is a non-issue for UWA focal lengths. If you want to stack stuff and have a CPL at 16mm, this is the system you should look into.

That said, I love my Lee setup. It's well built and has industry standard sizing so I am not married to first party 4x6 filters or CPLs. And it's flexible and powerful. I can double my ND grads on harsh sunlight, stack an ND grad with a 10 stop ND, and now with a front ring the CPL is an independent consideration if I need to manage the sky (only for longer FL) or reflections (at any FL). The only time I need to juggle/think is between 16-20mm, and that's fine by me.

- A
[/quote]

Thanks for the advise, but I have been using the Lee system (so far, the Big Stopper and a set of hard ND grads that I have also been using as straight NDs - planning to add real NDs and some soft grads soon). I have been enjoying the system. But, I have been limping along, putting my 77mm CPL between the lens and the Lee. It's nearly impossible to rotate the CPL then set the grads (at least without getting finger prints all over). Hence taking the next step and adding the 105 CPL ring and CPL. Like you, I will need to deal with the 16/17 to around 20mm.


----------



## Eagle Eye (Jul 29, 2014)

My test setup:
5d Mark II, tripod mounted, 18" away, EF 16-35mm f/4L IS, shooting at f/8, B+W 77mm XS-Pro 007 front filter, Lee wide-angle adaptor, Lee holder with two slots, 105mm ring, and a B+W Extra Wide KSM Circular Polarizer.

My results were the same; it vignettes ever so slightly at 19mm and is completely clear by 20mm. Removing just the 77mm XS-Pro 007, I have the same ever-so-slight vignetting at 17mm and it's clear at 18mm. 

If you want the maximum usable range on your 16-35mm with the CPL attached, get the Extra Wide CPL from B+W and remove the protective front filer: vignette-free from 18-35mm. If you insist on keeping the protective front filter on, just understand that you're limiting yourself to 20-35mm. 

As has been mentioned, you can always carry a second Lee holder with only one slot. I've got no vignetting at 16mm with B+W 007, wide angle adaptor, Lee holder with one slot, 105mm ring, and the B+W EW CPL. You'll just have to decide between long exposure and balanced lighting.


----------



## dppaskewitz (Jul 30, 2014)

Eagle Eye said:


> My test setup:
> 5d Mark II, tripod mounted, 18" away, EF 16-35mm f/4L IS, shooting at f/8, B+W 77mm XS-Pro 007 front filter, Lee wide-angle adaptor, Lee holder with two slots, 105mm ring, and a B+W Extra Wide KSM Circular Polarizer.
> 
> My results were the same; it vignettes ever so slightly at 19mm and is completely clear by 20mm. Removing just the 77mm XS-Pro 007, I have the same ever-so-slight vignetting at 17mm and it's clear at 18mm.
> ...



Very informative. Thank you. I think you just cost me something north of $500 (B+W 105 Extra Wide CPL, 105 mm ring and extra Lee holder (for one slot only). I have been on the fence, but this seems to be the way to go. Oh, and that's not counting the difference between what I get for my 17-40 and what the 16-35 F4 costs me.


----------



## NancyP (Jul 30, 2014)

Thanks for posting this information. I have been considering buying this lens, and wondered how it would behave with the Lee system.


----------



## Halfrack (Jul 31, 2014)

Instead of adapting for and purchasing a 105mm CPL, just get a 4x4 CPL from Lee or other mfgs...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/216637-REG/LEE_Filters_PLC_G_4x4_Circular_Polarizer_Glass.html


----------



## dppaskewitz (Jul 31, 2014)

Halfrack said:


> Instead of adapting for and purchasing a 105mm CPL, just get a 4x4 CPL from Lee or other mfgs...
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/216637-REG/LEE_Filters_PLC_G_4x4_Circular_Polarizer_Glass.html



This solution requires two Lee foundation kits that rotate independently (so you can align your grad and CPL independently of one another). If I recall correctly other posts on this topic, you end up with a vignetting issue when you get down to UWAs. If I'm wrong, I would be happy to know that.


----------



## emko (Jul 31, 2014)

sorry for stupid question but if i put a 10stop nd filter and a CPL i cant see anything what do you do to find out how much to turn the CPL for example to remove reflections in water?


----------



## Otter (Jul 31, 2014)

emko said:


> sorry for stupid question but if i put a 10stop nd filter and a CPL i cant see anything what do you do to find out how much to turn the CPL for example to remove reflections in water?



You need to do is rotate your CPL until you achieve the desired result, then put your 10 stop ND filter in. A 10 stop ND filter is always last to go in after you have set up your composition and adjusted any needed filters as you can't see anything after it is in front of your lens.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 31, 2014)

Otter said:


> emko said:
> 
> 
> > sorry for stupid question but if i put a 10stop nd filter and a CPL i cant see anything what do you do to find out how much to turn the CPL for example to remove reflections in water?
> ...



That's correct. My approach (noting I've only used mine about 5 times) is below, and any comments/feedback would be welcomed:

1) I scout the shot handheld and then set up. Tripod, cable release, Lee ring & holder, etc.

2) Switch to M, Av, Tv mode -- whatever you prefer. ISO 100*. Always shoot RAW with the Big Stopper -- many have a color shift that you need to back out in post, and RAW gives you a greater ability to do that. For a host of reasons, I switch to manual focus before doing anything. (Forgetting to do this later can burn you when the Big Stopper is in place.) I never remember to do this, but this is where I _should_ cover the optical viewfinder for the odd risk of light leak.

3) In LiveView, I frame up everything the way I want it. _Everything but the Big Stopper_ should be in place (CPL, ND Grad perhaps, etc.) and rotated / located the way I want it. I won't get into composition as I'm a rookie on that front, but on the technical side of things, I usually opt to manually focus at 10x zoom 1/3 of the way into the frame as many landscapers recommend.

4) If LiveView is showing me what I want to see in the shot (minus the long exposure the Big Stopper will give me), I write down or remember my aperture and ISO settings.

5) I put my Big Stopper in. My new shutter speed will be whatever I had before times 2^10 = 1024. (Note this is a rough number and that your specific Big Stopper may vary a bit -- you'll learn this as you shoot with it.) You can do the math yourself, read the card that came with your Big Stopper, or just get an ND filter app for your phone.

6) I usually just switch to Bulb mode, but you technically don't _have to_ if the computed time is under 30 seconds -- you can use M mode then. I input the ISO and aperture from LiveView, and I take the shot with a cable release (in the locked position) and a timer on my phone. I haven't invested in an cable release with a built-in timer, but that is an option as well.

*I'd imagine that you don't _always_ want 1,024x slowdown and buttery blending. But if you don't have standalone ND filters that are less strong than the Big Stopper, could you cheat and push ISO up to speed up the shot in Step 4, and by extension, take a much shorter final exposure, right? I know jacking up ISO is heresy for a landscape shooter, but it is _possible_, right? 

Feedback appreciated if there is an easier/better way to use the Big Stopper, thanks!

- A


----------



## dppaskewitz (Jul 31, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Otter said:
> 
> 
> > emko said:
> ...



I am by no means an expert. I have used other NDs more than the Big Stopper, but the principles are pretty much the same. I concur with you and have only a few additional thoughts.

I use M mode almost all the time (except, for example, from a moving train), because that is what I am getting used to (makes much more sense to me than exposure compensation, for example). I suppose Av would also work, but that seems to me to be an extra step, once the aperture is set in M anyway. Concur on RAW (if using LR, I don't see the need to shoot anything else). I use back button focus. Then, if I remember not to push the back button after focusing, however I have focused (that is, using either camera mode or tweaking with the focus ring in Live View), I am set with focus and don't need to switch back and forth to manual focus.

I do use 100 ISO unless I am using other NDs than the Big Stopper, for example 2 stops plus 3 stops, and need another stop slower. Then I use 50 ISO. I haven't thought of or tried your idea of pushing ISO and adjusting exposure time.

I tend to use an app to check depth of field because my eyesight isn't great. I do use live view and 10X magnification when possible (i.e., when there isn't a glare problem I can't overcome).

I don't follow you on the shutter speed being 1024 times whatever the camera said without the Big Stopper (at set ISO and aperture). I find either the Big Stopper card or a phone app. will give the answer.

I'm not sure what you mean by inputting the ISO and aperture. Aren't those already in the camera? Don't you just adjust the shutter speed by the 10 stops (or so, depending on your Big Stopper)?

I've been just counting out the seconds when I need to go to bulb, but the EXIF data generally tells me I got it wrong (I didn't give it as much time as I thought I did), so I like your idea of using the cell phone timer. Or investing in a cable release with timer (so many gadgets, so little money).

DPP


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 1, 2014)

dppaskewitz said:


> I am by no means an expert. I have used other NDs more than the Big Stopper, but the principles are pretty much the same. I concur with you and have only a few additional thoughts.
> 
> I use M mode almost all the time (except, for example, from a moving train), because that is what I am getting used to (makes much more sense to me than exposure compensation, for example). I suppose Av would also work, but that seems to me to be an extra step, once the aperture is set in M anyway. Concur on RAW (if using LR, I don't see the need to shoot anything else). I use back button focus. Then, if I remember not to push the back button after focusing, however I have focused (that is, using either camera mode or tweaking with the focus ring in Live View), I am set with focus and don't need to switch back and forth to manual focus.
> 
> ...



Great stuff, thanks.

A few responses:


I always forget about back button AF. I'm too stubborn to switch, but yes, that would cleverly solve the shutter button refocus problem I referred to.


ND 3.0 = 10 stops, right? That's 2^10 (i.e. 1,024) times less light getting through, so that's your shutter speed multiplier, isn't it? My phone app says 1000x for a 3.0 ND, and the Lee card would seem to corroborate that: http://www.speedgraphic.co.uk/Portals/1/product/images/prd8e36ed5a-8cf0-430f-a76c-22bcdd6e3154.jpg


"Inputting ISO and aperture" means that I leave M or Av mode (whatever mode I framed the shot in) and go to Bulb. Switching settings (especially away from Av) often moves things back to what I last shot manually, which usually means I lose my settings. I have to do to bulb usually b/c my exposures are often longer than 30 seconds and all modes other than Bulb caps at 30s, I thought. Bulb mode is basically M without a shutter speed input, so all you need is ISO and aperture -- that's where the statement came from.

- A


----------



## emko (Aug 1, 2014)

i have the screw on filters so i am thinking the holders are easier to setup


----------



## dppaskewitz (Aug 1, 2014)

Thanks for your input. I'm learning. My comments below in RED.



ahsanford said:


> Great stuff, thanks.
> 
> A few responses:
> 
> ...


----------



## fynnieb (Aug 28, 2014)

Hi There, Im new to the Filter world and just wondering if you could help me.

I see your test and wonder why Im getting this issue on my shot, I've just used the big stopper and .9grad on some shots down the beach and even at 19mm and F8 on my 16-35 F4 ( 5diii ) i seem to have darker corners graduating into my shot. At 16 very bad, I have the wide angle adaptor and only the two filters in. Ive spoken to the Suppliers today and they say its the lens. but its brand new and doesn't do this in normal shots, 

Thanks and I appreciate anyones feedback - is the F4 lens different to the 2.8 some how and can this effect it? am Doing something wrong?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2014)

fynnieb said:


> Hi There, Im new to the Filter world and just wondering if you could help me.
> 
> I see your test and wonder why Im getting this issue on my shot, I've just used the big stopper and .9grad on some shots down the beach and even at 19mm and F8 on my 16-35 F4 ( 5diii ) i seem to have darker corners graduating into my shot. At 16 very bad, I have the wide angle adaptor and only the two filters in. Ive spoken to the Suppliers today and they say its the lens. but its brand new and doesn't do this in normal shots,
> 
> Thanks and I appreciate anyones feedback - is the F4 lens different to the 2.8 some how and can this effect it? am Doing something wrong?



That should not be happening. Since we have the same lens, the only things I can think of are:


You might be shooting with a _standard_ Lee ring and not a _WA_ (wide angle) Lee ring. The WA rings tuck the entire apparatus closer to the lens to minimize the risk of vignetting. See this video for what I am talking about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVPVBR3CKRk -- I believe you have to have the WA ring for shooting wider than 24mm on a FF rig.


You said you have two filters in, but that isn't what matters -- how many _slots_ are in your holder? A three slot holder will vignette more than than a two slot holder, and so on. Think about it for a sec and it should make sense: the more something of width/diameter X gets pushed away from the front lens element, the more likely it will creep into the field of view. 


Do you already have a filter on your lens before you screw in your Lee ring? That will stack the thickness and you will see vignetting kick in 'sooner' as you go from long to wide on the focal length. In WA lenses, you really need to screw the ring on to the naked lens to avoid/minimize vignetting.


Are you using the Lee system holder, or do you have another company's holder? Lee isn't the only one that works, but the data I gave was for their 'Foundation' holder from the 100mm system. Other holders may have slightly different thickness and location to the front element of the lens, which may affect your results.

That's the best I can think of.

- A


----------



## alben (Aug 28, 2014)

Agree with ahsanford`s method, only things I can add are to set WB manually before inserting BS, (one colour cast is enough to remove) daylight seems to work best and do cover the OV, blue tack or a piece of electrical tape will do the job.

Regards Alan


----------



## Khalai (Aug 29, 2014)

fynnieb said:


> Hi There, Im new to the Filter world and just wondering if you could help me.
> 
> I see your test and wonder why Im getting this issue on my shot, I've just used the big stopper and .9grad on some shots down the beach and even at 19mm and F8 on my 16-35 F4 ( 5diii ) i seem to have darker corners graduating into my shot. At 16 very bad, I have the wide angle adaptor and only the two filters in. Ive spoken to the Suppliers today and they say its the lens. but its brand new and doesn't do this in normal shots,
> 
> Thanks and I appreciate anyones feedback - is the F4 lens different to the 2.8 some how and can this effect it? am Doing something wrong?



I experienced similar corner darkening with my LittleStopper and .75ND G. There may be obstruction problem with the Stoppers foam ring perhaps?


----------



## xps (Aug 29, 2014)

I prefer to use an srew-in polarisation filter. The glass filter from Lee are to dark. (High transmission polarisation filter). Heliopan is producing one of the "brightest" polarisation filter (high transmission), followed by the Käsemann multicoated (this filter is just a little bit darker - but more expensive).


----------



## xps (Aug 29, 2014)

Halfrack said:


> Instead of adapting for and purchasing a 105mm CPL, just get a 4x4 CPL from Lee or other mfgs...
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/216637-REG/LEE_Filters_PLC_G_4x4_Circular_Polarizer_Glass.html



I was not satisfied by the darkness of this filter. And I had the problem of a "grey shaping" - the light was reflecting inside the filter when used in bright sunlight. This "grey shaping" did not appear by using an screw-in filter.


----------



## xps (Aug 29, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> dppaskewitz said:
> 
> 
> > This is very helpful. I'm still using the 17-40 but hope to migrate to the 16-35 f/4 shortly. I've been in the process of trying to figure out the Lee holder/CPL/UWA conundrum. Next step: order the 105 ring and the B&W CPL. Thanks.
> ...



The wonderpana system works well, but it is much more expensive than the more common Lee system. A friend of mine uses this system (Nikon 14mm). He told me that the filters are from great quality.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2014)

xps said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > dppaskewitz said:
> ...



I have not seen a comprehensive review that states that the _quality_ of the Wonderpana system is better. But in common sense, it logically should cost more -- it's much larger and therefore requires larger filter elements.

Personally, I would stay with Lee unless you _*must must must*_ have the ability to stack three things at 14-16mm on FF. In my limited experience, that doesn't come up that often. Staying with Lee keeps you in the landscapers-standard 4x4 / 4x6 ecosystem, where there will be many more filter options -- both in design/style and price levels.

- A


----------



## dlleno (Aug 29, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Personally, I would stay with Lee unless you _*must must must*_ have the ability to stack three things at 14-16mm on FF. In my limited experience, that doesn't come up that often. Staying with Lee keeps you in the landscapers-standard 4x4 / 4x6 ecosystem, where there will be many more filter options -- both in design/style and price levels.
> 
> - A



/\
|
|
this nails it. BTW Lee has a larger system as well -- their SW150, originally developed for the Nikon 14-24, which can be used on other lenses as well with the SW150 system adapter. I went down a similar analysis road myself, and came to the same conclusion - one needs to decide if you need the capability to use the more expensive and limited options for filters that are 6-inches WIDE.


----------



## M_S (Jul 8, 2015)

I used the 105 B+W on a 24-70 II + 2 slot Lee filter with 105 ring attached. It vignettes heavily up until 30mm. Not recommended!


----------



## Scriv (Jan 11, 2017)

I know this thread is a couple years old, but can anyone tell me if you get vignetting at 16mm with the Lee holder setup with ONE slot, and the 105 ring with a circular polarizer.

Thanks.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2017)

Scriv said:


> I know this thread is a couple years old, but can anyone tell me if you get vignetting at 16mm with the Lee holder setup with ONE slot, and the 105 ring with a circular polarizer.
> 
> Thanks.



Forgive me, but pulling slots off the holder is a tiny/piecey mess, so I pulled my 2 slot + CPL ring setup out, removed the adaptor ring that threads into the lens altogether and tried to hold the holder manually over the lens in a one-slot closer than it ought to be position. I didn't center it well and the result was inconclusive.

My guess is that it that 100% depends on the specific CPL you use, but for a garden variety Lee or B+W 105mm CPL, I think it will still vignette slightly at 16mm. Why do I think this? The CPL outer rail that sticks out beyond the CPL ring is as thick as _both_ slots. It's a solid 8mm or so (B+W Kaesemann 105mm) versus perhaps the 4mm per slot, so my guess is you'd be somewhere between my first and second scenarios in my original post.

However, if you used either a slim 105 CPL or B+W's step-ring version (105 thread + much larger outer ring to fight vignetting), the situation would become more favorable for you. Neither are great options, as the former would undoubtedly be a bear to secure and remove, and the latter costs a mint.

- A


----------



## Eagle Eye (Jan 11, 2017)

Scriv said:


> I know this thread is a couple years old, but can anyone tell me if you get vignetting at 16mm with the Lee holder setup with ONE slot, and the 105 ring with a circular polarizer.
> 
> Thanks.



Take a look back at my post on page 1. With B+W's ultrawide 105mm KSM polarizer, a 007M protective filter, and a Lee filter holder with one slot, there's no vignetting at 16mm. Happy shooting!


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2017)

Eagle Eye said:


> Scriv said:
> 
> 
> > I know this thread is a couple years old, but can anyone tell me if you get vignetting at 16mm with the Lee holder setup with ONE slot, and the 105 ring with a circular polarizer.
> ...



Ah yes, I forgot you bought the extra-wide. That effectively takes the CPL out of the equation for vignetting, right? I'd imagine you'd see the same vignetting with that as you would with an empty CPL ring.

- A


----------

