In body filters

[pdk42]

Is anyone aware of the existence of in-body ND filters for Lumix L-mount cameras? I'm sort of thinking of giving the Sigma 12-24 f2.8 a spin, but ND filters are essential for what I do. External square filter holders are an option of course, but having used them in the past, I find them fiddly and just a PITA. I know that there are internal filters available for some cameras, but I've yet to find any for L-mount. Does anyone know differently?

 

[pdk42]

Another option perhaps is to go for this, with the older 12-24 f4 for Canon EF. It's an EF to L-mount adapter with a built-in variable ND.

NDT Fusion Auto Adapter - Canon EF Lens to L-Mount Cameras w/ Variable ND

Sometimes you need more than a simple adapter to mount a lens onto a camera - you need real power. Seize control over the electronic features of your lenses with a FUSION lens adapter. The FUSION technology built into the adapter enables electronic communication between mixed lens and camera...

fotodioxpro.com

 

[Pete_W]

I had never looked at this lens before so did some Googling and saw that the lens has a fixed petal hood. I can see why a filter would be difficult!

I also found the DPR review from 2016 and noted that it said this:

"The Sigma 12-24mm F4 offers some very nice optical performance at the short end of its focal range and excellent AF performance as well... Unfortunately, the central sharpness in the Sigma suffers a great deal at and beyond 20mm. This is compounded by the fact that the best performance in terms of sharpness is only attainable by focusing at the shooting aperture instead of focusing wide open..."​

 

[pdk42]

I had never looked at this lens before so did some Googling and saw that the lens has a fixed petal hood. I can see why a filter would be difficult!

I also found the DPR review from 2016 and noted that it said this:

"The Sigma 12-24mm F4 offers some very nice optical performance at the short end of its focal range and excellent AF performance as well... Unfortunately, the central sharpness in the Sigma suffers a great deal at and beyond 20mm. This is compounded by the fact that the best performance in terms of sharpness is only attainable by focusing at the shooting aperture instead of focusing wide open..."​

Hmm - maybe not for me then. Thanks for that info Pete!

 

[The Rigger]

When I began looking at the S5 for astrophotography, one of the things I searched for was in-body filters; we use a LOT of different filters for Astro work, accentuating different parts of the light spectrum when shooting nebulae and reducing the effects of light pollution. I never did find a filter maker who made any in-body filters of any type that fit any LUMIX camera.

 

[pdk42]

When I began looking at the S5 for astrophotography, one of the things I searched for was in-body filters; we use a LOT of different filters for Astro work, accentuating different parts of the light spectrum when shooting nebulae and reducing the effects of light pollution. I never did find a filter maker who made any in-body filters of any type that fit any LUMIX camera.

That’s a pity. But thanks for corroborating my own searches.

 

[Andreas]

Is anyone aware of the existence of in-body ND filters for Lumix L-mount cameras? I'm sort of thinking of giving the Sigma 12-24 f2.8 a spin, but ND filters are essential for what I do. External square filter holders are an option of course, but having used them in the past, I find them fiddly and just a PITA. I know that there are internal filters available for some cameras, but I've yet to find any for L-mount. Does anyone know differently?

There is no Sigma 12-24 f2.8 lens. There is an older 12-24mm f4 DG lens and a newer (and much improved) 14-28mm f2.8 DG DN. Assuming that you are talking about the newer lens, it comes with a built-in rear filter holder that takes small, inexpensive ND filters. For example, Haida makes a kit of 4 ND filters that are designed to fit this lens and costs about $100. There is no need to use an external filter holder or an in-camera filter holder. By the way, the new Sigma 14mm f1.4 lens uses the same filters, so if you decide that the zoom is not quite fast enough, you will be able to use the same filters when you upgrade to the prime .

 

[Oíche]

Another option perhaps is to go for this, with the older 12-24 f4 for Canon EF. It's an EF to L-mount adapter with a built-in variable ND.

NDT Fusion Auto Adapter - Canon EF Lens to L-Mount Cameras w/ Variable ND

Sometimes you need more than a simple adapter to mount a lens onto a camera - you need real power. Seize control over the electronic features of your lenses with a FUSION lens adapter. The FUSION technology built into the adapter enables electronic communication between mixed lens and camera...

fotodioxpro.com

You'll get more vignetting using an adapter, especially with UWA. I noticed this last week with my Samyang 14mm f2.8 and no in-camera lens corrections, that Samyang doesn't even have a built-in lens profile and I was using a dumb adapter anyhow. I can however correct in Lightroom.

Also does that Fotodiox adapter transmit any 3rd party profiles and can Lumix use a Canon profile if it has one? I doubt it so you'd need to in post.

TBH I wouldn't bother spending that money on an adapter for old DSLR lenses. I'd also reckon you wouldn't like variable NDs either.

As rigger said the newest Sigma Art 14-24 f2.8 has the rear filter holder, this is the best method for UWA lenses that need a bulbous front element for sharp corner to corner performance with minimal coma/astigmatism. This is usually for astro i.e stars as why else would you need that, so brings me to the question why do you want such a lens seeing you use f8?

BTW the Samyang 14mm f2.8 is actually very good for this and I already had it, I paid about £229 or something for it about 10 years ago. That's what I used for the aurora last week so that's a bargain option for you if the aurora has sparked something in you, pun intended

The new Sigma is a whopping £1319 but with 18 elements including FLD it is worth it over buying old DSLR lenses and adapters.

Personally I'd love the Sigma 14mm f1.4 for UW field astro and it's basically a specialist for this, it has one more element than the 14-24 and 3x FLDs.

BTW Sigma claim their FLD is equivalent to flourite elements which can be found in APO astronomy telescopes and Nikon has them in their uber expensive £15k 600mm f4 etc. I doubt it matches flourite but you are getting value for money in that £1319 and the rear filter holder can't be found in anything else besides the mentioned 14 f1.4.

Just get it

 

[AlanC]

I had never looked at this lens before so did some Googling and saw that the lens has a fixed petal hood. I can see why a filter would be difficult!

I also found the DPR review from 2016 and noted that it said this:

"The Sigma 12-24mm F4 offers some very nice optical performance at the short end of its focal range and excellent AF performance as well... Unfortunately, the central sharpness in the Sigma suffers a great deal at and beyond 20mm. This is compounded by the fact that the best performance in terms of sharpness is only attainable by focusing at the shooting aperture instead of focusing wide open..."​

That's the DSLR f/4 version. The 14-24 f/2.8 DG DN Art is a much better lens: LensTip review

 

[CharlesH]

Is anyone aware of the existence of in-body ND filters for Lumix L-mount cameras? I'm sort of thinking of giving the Sigma 12-24 f2.8 a spin, but ND filters are essential for what I do.

I assume you mean the 14-24mm f2.8 Sigma. I have that lens and use the Haida rear lens filters. They are easy to use and work well. I see a set on B&H for $109.

 

[Oíche]

I assume you mean the 14-24mm f2.8 Sigma. I have that lens and use the Haida rear lens filters. They are easy to use and work well. I see a set on B&H for $109.

Only place in the UK that has them unfortunately is amazon uk, I never buy anything from them unless I can't get it anywhere else. I prefer to give my money to camera shops and small businesses.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Haida-Rear...er&nsdOptOutParam=true&qid=1729450290&sr=8-11

3,4,6 and 10 stop. I wonder how good the 10 stopper is? Maybe the smaller ones have an advantage of uniformity as years ago you 'needed' a Lee "big stopper" which was really expensive. These are £20.75 each and Lee 77mm 10 stop is £180

 

[pdk42]

I assume you mean the 14-24mm f2.8 Sigma. I have that lens and use the Haida rear lens filters. They are easy to use and work well. I see a set on B&H for $109.

Thanks for the tip Charles. I hadn’t realised the 14-24 f2.8 had a rear filter holder.

 

[pdk42]

There is no Sigma 12-24 f2.8 lens. There is an older 12-24mm f4 DG lens and a newer (and much improved) 14-28mm f2.8 DG DN. Assuming that you are talking about the newer lens, it comes with a built-in rear filter holder that takes small, inexpensive ND filters. For example, Haida makes a kit of 4 ND filters that are designed to fit this lens and costs about $100. There is no need to use an external filter holder or an in-camera filter holder. By the way, the new Sigma 14mm f1.4 lens uses the same filters, so if you decide that the zoom is not quite fast enough, you will be able to use the same filters when you upgrade to the prime .

Thank you Andreas. Yes, I was getting confused between the new 14-24 f2.8 and the older 12-24 f4. I hadn’t realised that the 14-24 has a rear holder (wish more UWA lenses did that).

 

[pdk42]

why do you want such a lens seeing you use f8?

Good question ! Well, I’ve been looking at shots I’ve taken with the 14-28. If I take a more critical view of its corner performance, I can see weaknesses. It’s by no means a bad lens, but it’s not critically sharp, and contrast drops off noticeably too.

So I’m looking at alternatives - maybe. Looking at samples from the 16-35 f4, it really doesn’t look any better - which is surprising given the price difference.

But the 14-24 f2.8 looks to be very sharp and contrasty right across the frame. Certainly at f8!

But it’s a lot bigger and heavier and of course it’s not the cheapest of lenses either. So …

 

[Oíche]

Well at least you could do aurora or astro landscapes with it if the latest phenomenon has got you interested but to use it at f8 is a complete waste and nobody but you looks at corners for general landscape photos. TBH I really don't think you need it. Such fast high IQ lenses are meant to be used wide open. You are not into close UWA either which these can be used for so why buy a fast lens and stop it down to f8? Your Lumix is fine for your needs and you raved about it before with images so I don't see the point ...

But I suggest you get into astro landscapes and there maybe are a few more big aurora events soon, then nothing for many years.

 

[Andreas]

Well at least you could do aurora or astro landscapes with it if the latest phenomenon has got you interested but to use it at f8 is a complete waste and nobody but you looks at corners for general landscape photos. ...

I definitely look at the corners of landscape photos. Maybe it's just the two of us, but I doubt it.

 

[GeorgeHudetz]

Good question ! Well, I’ve been looking at shots I’ve taken with the 14-28. If I take a more critical view of its corner performance, I can see weaknesses. It’s by no means a bad lens, but it’s not critically sharp, and contrast drops off noticeably too.

So I’m looking at alternatives - maybe. Looking at samples from the 16-35 f4, it really doesn’t look any better - which is surprising given the price difference.

But the 14-24 f2.8 looks to be very sharp and contrasty right across the frame. Certainly at f8!

But it’s a lot bigger and heavier and of course it’s not the cheapest of lenses either. So …

Yes, I have both the S-Pro 16-35 F4 and the 14-24 F2.8 Art. The Sigma is certainly the better lens, particularly in the corner, and even at F8. It becomes more obvious when you use HR mode. That Sigma is truly an outstanding lens. Better at 24mm than the Sigma 24-70 F2.8 Art, for example.

And, I do have the Haida drop-in filters. They seem to work OK, but I've never looked closely at pixel-level performance. I'm happy to do a test shot if you want. Be warned: they are fiddly and easy to drop. Forget about using gloves. Also, easy to forget they are mounted. "Why is my exposure time so &%#$%$ long????" LOL.

And, on top of that, I also have the older Sigma 12-24 F4 Art. It's a very good lens but a bit soft at 24 mm. I'm not sure that I would say it's soft at 20mm+, however. When looking at reviews of the older Sigma 12-24s, be careful, as I think Sigma had three different 12-24s, and some were not great. The tank-like Art is very good. I've used it to create a 12mm HR image of Bryce Canyon using the S1R and was quite impressed. Mine is an SA mount and I have the Sigma adapter which does allow drop-in filters, but they are different than those used in the 14-24 F2.8. I was able to get a few drop-ins for the adapter from Aurora Aperture which are excellent, but they are hard to get. I had to wait 2+ months for mine and I'm not sure they make them any more.

Having said all that my 14-28 F2.8 is my most prized UWA zoom.

 

[pdk42]

Well at least you could do aurora or astro landscapes with it if the latest phenomenon has got you interested but to use it at f8 is a complete waste and nobody but you looks at corners for general landscape photos. TBH I really don't think you need it. Such fast high IQ lenses are meant to be used wide open. You are not into close UWA either which these can be used for so why buy a fast lens and stop it down to f8? Your Lumix is fine for your needs and you raved about it before with images so I don't see the point ...

You're probably right. As I said, the 14-28 isn't a bad lens. And I suspect I'm the only one who will notice any potential weaknesses in the corners. Well, maybe @Andreas too

But I suggest you get into astro landscapes and there maybe are a few more big aurora events soon, then nothing for many years.

Astro landscapes can be fun, but the challenge is always light pollution. Unless I go up into the North Yorkshire moors, or Scotland, or some parts of Wales/Lake District then I'll be cursing the urban lighting. But all these places are a good distance from me so there's a lot of inertia to overcome to do get up there.

 

[Oíche]

You're probably right. As I said, the 14-28 isn't a bad lens. And I suspect I'm the only one who will notice any potential weaknesses in the corners. Well, maybe @Andreas too

Astro landscapes can be fun, but the challenge is always light pollution. Unless I go up into the North Yorkshire moors, or Scotland, or some parts of Wales/Lake District then I'll be cursing the urban lighting. But all these places are a good distance from me so there's a lot of inertia to overcome to do get up there.

Yeah, here has much less population density. My aurora photos at that coastal harbour is only 25 miles away, 45 min or so and a Bortle 4 sky. Even darker skies around 1 hour away on North coast plus the ocean with obviously no light pollution coming from there.

However there are astrophotographers who get great results in London and the new astrophotography robots can do it also. This is not including landscape though which the light pollution filters would mess with, but you could do composites etc. but I've never tried these.

 

[dirk]

Hi Paul,

have you already had a look at Kase filters? They have a product line called magnetic round filtes. These are round. Very easy to use. Not cheap, but how often do you buy filters? I got that tip from a landscape photographer on youtube. I bought them for me in size 77mm (biggest lens I have) and use adapters to get to that size with each lens. Easy to use, easy to carry around.

Professional Set - Enhance Your Image Quality with Magnetic Round Filter Set

Discover the power of our Professional Set, a premium collection of ROUND Wolverine ND filters. Designed for professional photographers, this magnetic round filter set by Kase is an essential tool for enhancing image quality. With exceptional color fideli

kasefilters.eu

Pay attention that you get the newer version ( I have no direct link to them), they improved that line.