Canon LTM Canon 35mm f2.8 filter thread size?

[Gerry M]

Can someone tell me the filter thread size on the Canon 35mm f2.8, all silver, with infinity lock, type 4 lens? Measures about 33-34mm.
Thanks,
Gerry

 

[kermaier]

34mm screw-in or A36 push/clamp-on.
::Ari

 

[terrafirmanada]

34 is correct

 

[terrafirmanada]

oh, i see your from newport. i was just down there surfing last week great place. we just moved to portland and have great memories from your neck of the woods already. great lense btw. very similar in every quality to the 28mm 3.5. loved them both.

 

[venchka]

Yes! The original hood is Series VI screw in. 34mm to Series VI adapter rings are plentiful.

 

[ampguy]

If that's the same size as the 28/2.8, I've found the heavystar Canon to 40.5 and Canon to 43mm step-up rings inexpensive, and a perfect fit.

 

[kermaier]

Yes! The original hood is Series VI screw in. 34mm to Series VI adapter rings are plentiful.

The original hood is bigger than the lens. 🙂 I've been looking for something smaller, with limited success.

 

[Gerry M]

Thanks, all. I have the Canon clamp on adapter and the Canon Ser VI hood. With this combo, I tend to have minor vignetting. I think the hood might be a bit too deep. I would like to come up with a solution to this.
Gerry

 

[Gerry M]

oh, i see your from newport. i was just down there surfing last week great place. we just moved to portland and have great memories from your neck of the woods already. great lense btw. very similar in every quality to the 28mm 3.5. loved them both.

Were you at Agate Beach? There is supposed to be a very good spot at Lincoln City, but it isn't publicized, or so I am told. If you think about it, the next time you head over this way, PM me and maybe we can meet. I'm way to old to surf, tho 🙁 .

 

[kermaier]

Thanks, all. I have the Canon clamp on adapter and the Canon Ser VI hood. With this combo, I tend to have minor vignetting. I think the hood might be a bit too deep. I would like to come up with a solution to this.
Gerry

I never noticed vignetting, but I'm using an R-D1. I've considered that a Leitz FOOKH might work, but those are kind of pricey.
::Ari

 

[Ljós]

34mm filter options

34mm filter options

Dear all,
I am glad this thread came up, I was just about to start one about (yellow and red) filter options for the Canon (Serenar) 28/3.5 - it has the 34mm thread just like the 35/2.8, so I might as well post here. Thanks for the answers so far, I just learned about the A36 clamp-on possibility.

@ ampguy: You mentioned the 28/2.8 and the Canon to 40.5 and 43mm step-up adapters. Now it turns out the Canon 28/2.8 has a 40mm thread, so that the heavystar adapters will not be (directly) feasible for someone looking to use filters on a 35/2.8 or 28/3.5, but thanks for bringing the heavystar adapters up.

So to answer the OPs question, there are 4 possibilities:
- there are 34mm filters to be found, but choice is not so great
- A36 36mm clamp on (Leitz)
- use step-up rings: for example 34mm to 37mm rings are not too hard to find, and you can go from there with 37mm to 40mm or 37mm to 40.5mm
- the series (VI) system. As already mentioned, 34mm to series VI rings are readily available on the net

That said, and I hope you still bear with me, there is one thing that bugs the hell out of me:
Isn't one of the greats assets of these lenses their recessed front elements! 🙂 And what a shame to have to cobble filters/rings/etc. to the front of the lense, way in front of the actual front element - kind of defeats one of the things the lens has going for it.

Wouldn't it be great if a small filter (smaller than 34mm) could be fitted in the recessed area of the lens. Anybody done this?
Reason I'm asking is: I guess I'll be fine with any of the 4 methods mentioned above - but then I will need some sort of hood/rim (maybe the retaining ring for a series filter will be enough) to keep the filter from flaring/brushing against stuff in daily life -- and then we may already be deeply in vignetting trouble.

So, has anybody any long term experience with using something like a yellow filter on a 35/2.8 or a 28/3.5?

Thanks in advance, Hannes.

 

[kermaier]

Dear all,
Isn't one of the greats assets of these lenses their recessed front elements! 🙂 And what a shame to have to cobble filters/rings/etc. to the front of the lense, way in front of the actual front element - kind of defeats one of the things the lens has going for it.

Well, the 35/2.8 in chrome (Serenar, et al.) is the only one of these that does not have a recessed front element. (The black/chrome 35/2.8, the 28/2.8 and both the chrome and black/chrome 28/3.5 all have recessed front elements such that a hood isn't really needed.)

::Ari

 

[Ljós]

Ari, my bad, thanks for the info. Don't want to hijack this 35/2.8 thread! 🙂

 

[kermaier]

Ari, my bad, thanks for the info. Don't want to hijack this 35/2.8 thread! 🙂

I wouldn't worry -- the thread already got hijacked from filters to hoods. 🙂

 

[venchka]

The Canon hood is fine.

The Canon hood is fine.

The original Canon hood marked for 50mm/1.8 and 35/2.8 does not vignette.

Not the best examples, but the upper left and upper right corners, respectively, are nice and bright. If anything, the hood is too short for the 50mm lens.

 

[John Shriver]

The 28/3.5 doesn't have much tolerance for accessories. No hood was made, since just the series adapter ring and a filter can vignette.

Yeah, FOOKH is crazy expensive. It should work on the 35/2.8 since the front element is about the same size as the 35mm Summarons. I wouldn't recommend the FLQOO, deeper than FOOKH for Elmar-formula 35/3.5 lenses with small front elements.

The rectangular Canon hood for 50/1.8 and 35/2.8 works very nicely on the 35/2.8, it's vented so it doesn't block the finder. The round Canon hood is obnoxious on either lens, eats a lot of finder.

 

[venchka]

Yikes!

Yikes!

... The round Canon hood is obnoxious on either lens, eats a lot of finder.

30+ years and I'm just finding out. Gosh, it sucks to be stupid. 😀

😎

 

[Ljós]

The 28/3.5 doesn't have much tolerance for accessories. No hood was made, since just the series adapter ring and a filter can vignette.

Thanks John. Not what I wanted to hear, but hey, you can't have it all 🙂 Looking at the lens there's the 34mm filter thread (in the chrome part), and then there is the inner, recessed part in black. And from the photos it looks like there were a second thread in the inner, black part of the lens. Would have been sweet to have been able to screw a small filter in there, big enough to cover the exit pupil of the lens. But I see (now) that that would vignette.

 

[kermaier]

Thanks John. Not what I wanted to hear, but hey, you can't have it all 🙂 Looking at the lens there's the 34mm filter thread (in the chrome part), and then there is the inner, recessed part in black. And from the photos it looks like there were a second thread in the inner, black part of the lens. Would have been sweet to have been able to screw a small filter in there, big enough to cover the exit pupil of the lens. But I see (now) that that would vignette.

Also, if you screw a filter into the inner ring and it binds, you risk unscrewing the front element's retaining ring trying to get it out. 🙁 (The Nikkor 50/2 has a similar setup, IIRC.)

 

[Ljós]

Also, if you screw a filter into the inner ring and it binds, you risk unscrewing the front element's retaining ring trying to get it out. 🙁 (The Nikkor 50/2 has a similar setup, IIRC.)

Ari, yikes! And then I'd be screwed twice ;-)
And yes, it made me think of the Nikkor 50/2 too... seems so silly to mount a 52mm filter on the Nikkor wayyyyyyyyyyy in front of the actual front element, which is rather tiny and nowhere near 52mm.
Hannes