g3 accessories 52 or 58 mm - DPChallenge Forums

05/16/2003 01:46:33 PM · #1

When i bought my g3 the vendor also offered a package of an adaptor tube and 3 filters for 52 mm and i bought that as well. Now, i want to get a teleconverter (close up rings and wide angle shortly) and Canon only offers lens converters for the 58 mm.

I recall mbardeen's post that he got 52 mm adaptor and filters and then found a teleconvertor on ebay.

My question is: should i consider the adaptor and filter package i bought just a mistake and a waste of money and buy a similar package for 58 mm and then go for Canon lens converters? Or, can i get teleconverters, and other converters, for 52 mm that will work for the g3? If so, could anyone give me some specific brand names so that i can search online (the local photography store isn't very good; my ebay savvy is limited and i hate buying something online that then doesn't work for my camera).

Thanks much for any info.

05/16/2003 02:03:13 PM · #2

I bought the 52mm adapter and assorted filters as well. If you want to use the Canon converters all you need is a 52-58 step-up ring which shouldn't cost more than $5.

05/16/2003 03:26:59 PM · #3

Thanks, cpanaioti. Dumb question probably, if i do buy the 58 mm Canon converters, i can still use my existing 52 mm filters?

05/16/2003 04:07:04 PM · #4

Yes, you can still use the 52mm filters (not with the converter).

Just for reference, I don't believe the Canon converters are threaded so you can't use filters with them.

When you are looking at converters you need to look at two things when deciding on which one to buy. 1: the thread size for attaching to your adapter (back - 52mm) and 2: the thread size for attaching filters - this will be larger.

For example: one lense I looked at on ebay had 52mm back end threads for attaching to the adapter and 58mm filter threads.

Hope this helps.

BTW. I bought the Lensmate 52mm adapter, circular polarizer, uv and closeup filters and am very happy with all of it. You might find their website interesting (they're a Seattle company ...)

//www.lensmateonline.com/

05/17/2003 01:13:53 AM · #5

Cpanaioti, really thanks a lot for your info. It's Friday night and i must be braindead: I went to that Lensmate link and now i just have more questions. Sorry for being such a pain in the neck.

Canon converters don't have threads for filters. So, in my mind, i'm not interested in Canon converters because i like to stick at least a U/V on them to protect the lens and i definitely use the polarizer a lot. Correct reasoning? They listed Kenko which has a native size of 52 mm and filter size of 67mm. Means i would have to buy (and carry along) 67 mm filters as well as the 52 mm? Forget that as well.

Actually, lensmate suggested to have two adaptors just for ease. That's not a bad idea. That's only $ 30. I just don't want two (or more) of everything: adaptors, filters, blah, blah,blah.

Now you're looking on ebay at a 52mm with 58 mm filter threads. That means then you will need to buy 58 mm filters (if you don't already have them).

So, my question is Why in the world did we (or just i) bother with the 52 mm filters in the first place? As i said it's Friday night and am half braindead. And finally, why does Canon not make converters with threads? I mean, Canon!

05/17/2003 01:36:45 AM · #6

The 52mm filters would be used when you don't have the converter attached. On the G3 you need to use the adapter if you want to use filters since the lense itself is not threaded.

One option, if you don't want to buy two sets of filters is to do the following:

1. Find the converter lense(s) you want and check what the filter thread size is
2. Buy a step-up ring from the adapter thread size to this filter size (not all step-ups are available, check with your local camera store)
3. Buy one set of filters. - disadvantage would be you're always removing a filter from the adapter to the converter and vice versa. I like the idea of putting a filter on and leaving it there. I have two adapters, one with my macro setup and one with the polarizer which I switch with the UV when I need to.

For example:
With a 52mm with 58mm filter threads you'd buy a 52mm adapter, 52-58 step-up ring, 58mm filters
The 52-58 step-up ring would only be needed when you were not using the converter.

At this time I think you're going to have a hard time finding a converter lense that has the same size adapter and filter threads if they are even available.

We bought the 52mm because they were cheaper than the 58mm and we didn't think of a better solution at the time.

There are also step-down rings so you might be able to find a converter with 52mm filter threads and then buy a step-down ring from 52 to the converter lense native size. Just another idea.

No problem with all the questions. They get me thinking of what I can do when I go to buy a converter (if I don't go the SLR route).

Message edited by author 2003-05-17 01:37:16.

05/17/2003 04:50:43 AM · #7

The Canon converters do have threads. They are 58mm (sorry about that Journey, I made a mistake in my original post).

If you plan on updating to a Canon SLR in the future and you want to use your existing filter collection then you probably want to stick with the 58mm as I think most of their SLR lenses have a 58mm thread. Someone with more experience with the Canon SLR line could give more information about this, Jacko or Gordon perhaps...

Hope this helps Journey!
-Matt

05/17/2003 07:00:49 AM · #8

I have a Canon film SLR and the lense has 72mm filter threads. It depends on the lense what the filter threads are.

The 58mm thread on the Canon converters is for attaching to the adapter. From what I've read it is indicated that there are no filter threads on these converters.

In fact, in the camera manual it states that filters and lense hoods should NOT be attached to the wide and tele converters (pg 183 in my copy).

Colette

Message edited by author 2003-05-17 07:02:00.

Nikon MF 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS

05/17/2003 10:22:21 AM · #9

It seems you do end up with a couple of adapters, some step rings and, eventually a lot of filters. I probably would like one combination for macro and another for everything else. Need to research now on how to get the best mix for the G3 before buying any converters. Canon converters is not the route to go. I'm really a little surprised about that but c'est la vie. From what little i have seen so far, Canon converters seem to better if it weren't for the no filter thread thing.

Colette, you said you have a macro 'filter' in a previous post. What exactly do you have for macro?

Helene

Message edited by author 2003-05-17 13:34:53.

mcmurma

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

05/17/2003 10:55:38 AM · #10

I recently got the canon 250D macro lens for my s30. Its the 52mm version, but I think they also have it in 58mm. So far I have found it to be a very nice macro attachment. It lets you get a lot closer and the image quality is superb.

The only problem with it is that its essentially 2 closeup filters welded into one package. You cant vary the strength of the filter except through the cam. But so far this hasn't been a problem, as I can use it full-wide or full-zoom for macro and dont get any vignetting. Not on the s30 anyway. Also, at around 70 bucks, it's not cheap. But it does come with 52mm lens threads on both sides, so I can use it with a polorizer, stack more filters, etc... if I want.

05/17/2003 11:32:35 AM · #11

Each time i think i have figured it out, a new post appears that then throws me totally off. Why would the Canon macro lens ($125 for 58 mm) have threads for filters but not the wide angle nor the teleconverter? And yup, what cpanaioti quoted about the manual (p 183) is correct.
I'm going to call Canon on Monday and hope to find this out. The reason i am so obnoxious about all of this, is that each time i want to buy something i come to the realization that with a previous purchase i really should have bought something else instead, including some feature the significance of which i was unaware of at the time :)

05/17/2003 12:06:12 PM · #12

I have the plus 1, plus 2 and plus 4 macro filter set from Hoya. I use them stacked most of the time for maximum effect. You can see them on the Lensmate site, //www.lensmateonline.com.

Message edited by author 2003-05-17 15:28:39.

05/17/2003 03:29:13 PM · #13

Sample shots with Hoya macro filters:

//community.webshots.com/album/73422967nWvacU/0

05/17/2003 07:41:02 PM · #14

While the Canon Tele and Wide Angle converts do no have threads (meaning you can't attach to the end) the Bayonet adapter which you need for any of the Canon-branded accessories is threaded. I have used all my filters quite successfully with that- as well as using my Canon Tele converter stacked (i.e. camera -> bayonet adapter -> filter (polarizer) -> Tele-converter.
Hope this helps clear the confusion - as for what the manual states.. I donno. I haven't read it yet. Maybe I should get around to doing that sometime. ;)

-Matt

05/18/2003 10:59:00 PM · #15

Originally posted by mbardeen:

Thanks for that tip. Do you get any vignetting when using this setup? Do you have any sample shots?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

05/27/2003 07:08:45 PM · #16

Today got my Canon teleconverter. I had decided and actually ordered an entirely different lens but reading some more posts here i thought about it and changed my mind and was fortunate enough to be able to cancel the order. So, am going to stay with Canon for any lens accessories; the logic makes sense. No, am not at all planning to keep the tele on all the time and i did try having the circ polarizer between the bayonet and the teleconverter and it works just fine. Am going to make some shots with it tonight.

Thanks for the input, everybody.

PS: what i'm going to need now is a new camera bag. I held off getting a new one because i just wasn't sure what my new standard gear was going to be but i see now a growing collection of filters, converters and other 'bare essentials'. Know the feeling? :)

Cpanaioti: you will get vignetting if you use these lenses at less than their max. They aren't really zoom lenses; they are meant to be used at their max, unless for certain shots you can live with the vignetting. I wasn't aware of any vignetting because of the filter stuck behind the lens.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

05/27/2003 07:27:09 PM · #17

I've got a growing collection of semi-useless camera bags. I've got 7 now ( only 1 that I bought, the rest prizes) and mostly they are too small for much more than a body and a lens.

The moral of the story is to make sure that the bag is bigger than you think you'll need for the short term. Always seems to be just too small for what you want to carry.

PS. if anyone can recommend a good bag to shoot from for a D60, with 1.4x and 70-200mm I'd like to hear about it. I can live with having to reverse the lens hood but it would be great to find a bag wide/ deep enough for this lens.

paganini

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

05/27/2003 07:31:19 PM · #18

Go to Frys in Austin, get the $69 Micro Trekker from Lowepro, it's a backpack, allowing 2 telephoto lenses (one attached to bodies) and numerous small lenses. I can fit the 70-200mm L in there, as well as 20-35 mm and 50 mm prime no problem. Lowepro has other models, but you might have to go to Precision (and get ripped off) for them or get them on the web.

Originally posted by Gordon:

paganini

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

05/27/2003 07:37:12 PM · #19

Teleconverters in general aren't worth the money unless you really want to have the extra mm. Plus they will degrade image quality one way or another. And they make the G2 looks bigger and no longer compact, sort of defeats the purpose of a compact camera.

Save the converter prices $200 for each or something so about $400 for wide + tele, and you're about 1/4 way to a 10D :-)

Originally posted by Journey:

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

05/27/2003 07:43:54 PM · #20

The prices are $100 and $140 for the Tele and the Wide Angle respectively.

That's hardly $400. My total kit - camera, teleconverter, 256mb flash card - cost just ovedr $800. That's a far cry from the $1500 plus however much for the lenses I'd have to buy to get the same sort of capability in a 10D. Granted, it's a quantum leap forward in image quality, but one that many people may not be able to afford.

-Matt

Message edited by author 2003-05-27 19:44:46.

paganini

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

05/27/2003 07:46:49 PM · #21

Is that the Canon ones? :)

Originally posted by mbardeen:

05/27/2003 07:53:16 PM · #22

Journey,
I have two camera bags. One is a Lowepro TLZ1, which is big enough to carry all my equipment and then some, but is too big for normal day use for me. I also have a more modular kit, with a Canon Bag (not sure the model number) which is big enough to fit the G3+Bayonet in sideways and able to carry two to three filters, and a couple assorted accessories. Then I have the teleadapter in the bag it came with, along with 3 more filters. I have used the modular system quite extensively and find it suits my needs rather well.

-Matt

05/27/2003 07:54:02 PM · #23

Yes.

Originally posted by paganini:

Is that the Canon ones? :)

05/27/2003 07:59:23 PM · #24

Whoops. My bad. Canon list is $149 for the Teleconverter and $199 for the Wide Angle. However I'm sure they can be had for less. I got my teleconverter off ebay for around $100.