Best Filter format

[Mike Phipps]

I know this is going to cast a newbie light to me to ask something that seems so elementary, but I was wondering if there is a primary filter size that "works better" with a mattebox in front of the dragon sensor. My biggest concern is making sure that I get an open format that will work with a variety of lenses, but since we are looking at glass filters, I would like to not get filters that are too big and don't need to be. I haven't used rectangular sensors in at least 6-7 years, and my last system to do so was an arri sr16 with 4x5.65 filters.

I will be using Canon Cn-e primes and possibly the Cn-e zoom series as my primary glass. The Cn-e lens that has the largest front diamater is the Cn-e 30-300, which has roughly a 5.3" diameter. Should i be looking at 6x6" filters for a lens of this size to make sure that it completely covers the entire lens element, or would a 4x5.65 or 5x5 filter be fine to not "crop" the image before it hits the sensor? Please correct me if I'm thinking about this the wrong way.

Knowing that the Dragon is slightly larger than the Mysterium-x, I just want to make sure that I don't buy into the wrong size system if it has a chance at having a negative impact down the road when the dragon upgrade becomes available.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

4x4 will vignette after 15mm or so at 6K, above that you are good to go. Below that 5K should be fine.

 

[Wey Wang]

There are basically 3 standard filter sizes for cinema:

4x5.65 - Which is sufficient for 90% of the lenses and sensors out there.
138mm round - For your polarizers and diopters, most filters that require some sort of spinning to get the desired effect.
6x6 - Which was designed for larger formats such as 70mm.

If you start getting 4x5 filters, you should be good for pretty much everything except for your 18mm or 16mm lenses (depending on the kind of matte box you have).

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

4x5 filters do not vignette at all until maybe 11mm. But neither do 4x4 above 15mm.

4x4 is fairly common here in quebec, and we have used them on 100K 30 second spots without issue.

 

[Daniel Soderberg]

My 18mm Super Speed doesn't vignette at 5K with my 4x5.65 matte box.

There are basically 3 standard filter sizes for cinema:

4x5.65 - Which is sufficient for 90% of the lenses and sensors out there.
138mm round - For your polarizers and diopters, most filters that require some sort of spinning to get the desired effect.
6x6 - Which was designed for larger formats such as 70mm.

If you start getting 4x5 filters, you should be good for pretty much everything except for your 18mm or 16mm lenses (depending on the kind of matte box you have).

 

[Eric M Hurt]

The question is really the size of the front of the lens and matte box.
A 95mm front diameter of an Ultra Prime will sit next to a 4x5.65 filter without hanging over the glass, so the filter will be fine, BUT then the question of the mattebox comes into play, how many filter trays (meaning how far the lens will have to sit back from the front on the box), how much flair the actually sides of the box have etc.
For instance, a 24-290 or a 180 Cooke (both with LARGE front elements) will not work well (or at all) with 4x5.65 because the opening of the lens is so large, meaning the filter will not cover the glass (and in the case of the 180mm) the lens will most likely be too large to fit into a regular 4x5.65 matte box. If you are using a set of regular Cookes or Ultra Primes then regular 4x5.6 matte box should work for most of the lenses, until you get into the very wide ones which may begin to vignette on the box itself.

 

[Nick Fury]

Hi Eric,

Bright Tangerine Matte boxes can probably be useful here. I don't have the lenses you list, such as the 24-290 to test, but maybe Curt Pair does... I would recommend trying a 3 stage matte box capable of taking 5x5 and 4 x 5.65. Try the lens with three 4 x 5.65" trays fitted (make sure they are the right way around). If the matte box vignettes switch out the the tray furthest away from the lens for 5x5" or the closest to the lens when you need to fully rotate a Pola. It's important to get the lens as close to the matt box as possible, try with and without a donut and in 2 stage. I think you'll get a combination that will work. BT, the reason I refer you to BT, is that their matte boxes have an amazing field of view - that’s what they are designed for. The VIV 5 and Strummer, OTOH, should work fine, but need the lenses to confirm.

Thank you very much

fury

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

The question is really the size of the front of the lens and matte box.
A 95mm front diameter of an Ultra Prime will sit next to a 4x5.65 filter without hanging over the glass, so the filter will be fine, BUT then the question of the mattebox comes into play, how many filter trays (meaning how far the lens will have to sit back from the front on the box), how much flair the actually sides of the box have etc.
For instance, a 24-290 or a 180 Cooke (both with LARGE front elements) will not work well (or at all) with 4x5.65 because the opening of the lens is so large, meaning the filter will not cover the glass (and in the case of the 180mm) the lens will most likely be too large to fit into a regular 4x5.65 matte box. If you are using a set of regular Cookes or Ultra Primes then regular 4x5.6 matte box should work for most of the lenses, until you get into the very wide ones which may begin to vignette on the box itself.

The question is field of view. Is the field of view wider or narrower than the edges of X-size filter at X distance. The size of the front glass of your lens may hint at field of view but that's it. This has nothing to do with brands or lines of lenses. 18mm is 18mm whether it be Cooke or Canon. Just put your matte box on rails rather than clip-on and you will never have varying issues

 

[Eric M Hurt]

Hi Eric,

Bright Tangerine Matte boxes can probably be useful here. I don't have the lenses you list, such as the 24-290 to test, but maybe Curt Pair does... I would recommend trying a 3 stage matte box capable of taking 5x5 and 4 x 5.65. Try the lens with three 4 x 5.65" trays fitted (make sure they are the right way around). If the matte box vignettes switch out the the tray furthest away from the lens for 5x5" or the closest to the lens when you need to fully rotate a Pola. It's important to get the lens as close to the matt box as possible, try with and without a donut and in 2 stage. I think you'll get a combination that will work. BT, the reason I refer you to BT, is that their matte boxes have an amazing field of view - that’s what they are designed for. The VIV 5 and Strummer, OTOH, should work fine, but need the lenses to confirm.

Thank you very much

fury

Yep, any decent 4x4.65 box such as Arri MB-20 for rail mounting or Arri LMB-5 for clip on,

Optimo 24mm-290mm pretty standard industry workhorse : http://www.angenieux.com/zoom-lenses/cinema-portfolio/optimo-24-290.htm

The front element is very large.

 

[Eric M Hurt]

This has nothing to do with brands or lines of lenses. 18mm is 18mm whether it be Cooke or Canon. Just put your matte box on rails rather than clip-on and you will never have varying issues

Not true.
If the front element of the lens is too large to fit into the matte box or to fit snug enough next to the filter, or even worse if the front element of the lens is actually LARGER than the filter itself then it very much has to do with the brand of lens.

An 18mm Canon lens may have a front diameter of 70mm give or take, while a Cooke 18mm has a front diameter of 110mm and the Optimo 24mm-290mm has a 162mm front diameter....big difference.

 

[Curt Pair]

If you're going to use an Optimo 24-290, you will need to step up your filter size to 6x6. The Bright Tangerine Strummer fits this lens with an adapter. The Blacklight fits with nothing else needed. Strummer is rail mount only. Blacklight is rail mount and/or clamp on. I've used both with this lens, as Fury eludes to and both work VERY well!

I think that with the Canon 30-300 you'd be better off, and save money by going with a larger filter size. I would recommend the 5.65x5.65 size. That can also be used with your other glass too. This way you don't have to buy two sizes... one for the larger lens and another for smaller stuff... Many folks do that... because the larger filters on smaller lenses create more weight... but if the budget is tight, you can make it go farther with a single set of filters at the largest size you need and use the appropriate 'step down' rings to get to the other lenses in your arsenal.

 

[Will Keir]

Look at the Bright Tangerine Mattebox, good guy and it's the widest mattebox on the market. 16mm shouldn't be a problem.

If you start getting 4x5 filters, you should be good for pretty much everything except for your 18mm or 16mm lenses (depending on the kind of matte box you have).

 

[Will Keir]

Don't they have screw on filters for the 12-1?

Yep, any decent 4x4.65 box such as Arri MB-20 for rail mounting or Arri LMB-5 for clip on,

Optimo 24mm-290mm pretty standard industry workhorse : http://www.angenieux.com/zoom-lenses/cinema-portfolio/optimo-24-290.htm

The front element is very large.

 

[Eric M Hurt]

Don't they have screw on filters for the 12-1?

I doubt it, at least not that I've ever used. I'm not sure the front of that lens is even threaded, but if I had to guess I would say no.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

Not true.
If the front element of the lens is too large to fit into the matte box or to fit snug enough next to the filter, or even worse if the front element of the lens is actually LARGER than the filter itself then it very much has to do with the brand of lens.

An 18mm Canon lens may have a front diameter of 70mm give or take, while a Cooke 18mm has a front diameter of 110mm and the Optimo 24mm-290mm has a 162mm front diameter....big difference.

Regardless of brand, the angle of field of view is exactly the same based on mm count, so the vignetting issue will be exactly the same.

There is no problem if you use a soft back and not if you don't clip-on. Again, field of view is field of view, and you will likely want to slide around that mattebox to avoid reflections when you start stacking filters - then fixed distance clip-on can become a bad strategy. Yes always needing to be on rails and using a soft stretchy back it's a small inconvenience, but we have about $15 000 of diffusion filters - that would have cost even more in 4x6 - so it seems OK for saving all that money.