UV Filter for the Century .6 Wide Adapter?

Norm Sanders

Norm Sanders

Script Wrangler
I'd like to protect the front of the lens on my new Century .6 adapter I just rec'd, but it's one heck of a lot bigger than the 72MM I have for the stock DVX lens.

Anyone have any idea what size I need, and if it will clear the curviture of the glass? Know a good brand that's cost effective? I got my UV filter for the DVX for about $24, so I'm hoping a protector for the wide angle won't be too much more.

Think I'll wait until Century comes out with an anamorphic & telephoto for the DVX before I order those ... just don't want to get Panasonic's if Century's around the corner & they have better glass.
 
Re: UV Filter for the Century .6 Wide Adapter?

I'm sure Bill Turner from Century who frequents this board can clarify but if it's anything like their teleconverter, you cannot actually screw any filters into this lens. The threads you see are just machine threads, not for filters.

This is a huge bummer because, like you say, you want to protect your investment and I'm not sure how to do it with Century lenses.
 
Re: UV Filter for the Century .6 Wide Adapter?

Ouch ... not what I wanted to hear. There must be some way to keep it safe while on the camera.

If not a filter, then a matte box? I've been hearing horror stories about how spendy those can be, but they sure make the camera look great ... also, since I have to take the built in shade off for the wide angle, I imagine a matte box is even that much more important?
 
Re: UV Filter for the Century .6 Wide Adapter?

I have to admit that I was really surprised that there weren't any front *filter* threads on the Century .6X lens. Not only that, but the design also precludes the use of any matte box I know of. I'm halfway through building a makeshift matte box out of black plastic stratocore board and velcro--and it's not going to be pretty--but it should do the job of shading and protection.
 
Re: UV Filter for the Century .6 Wide Adapter?

Just back from a trip and saw this post.

Trust me, we make every effort to provide a reasonable way to filter our accessories, if practical.

One of the problems is that the convention is to make the accessories outside diameter (O.D.) in increments of 5mm to make adapting matteboxes and sunshades easier, the video lens manufaturers follow this protocal for the most part.

The O.D. of the .6x is 95mm and it was designed prior to the DVX-100. On the XL1, whose zoom is not as wide as the DVX100 (5.5mm vs 4.5mm with the same size CCD's) and it could be filtered with a number of available accessories.

Standard filter sizes are 95mm ( to big if the OD is 95mm) and the next common smaller size is 86mm (in a threaded filter) which is too small.

We are considering in the future making the front threads conform to standard protocols but that may not mean there exists a filter to fit.

The O.D. of the 1.6X tele is 105mm, we are considering changing the thread to 102 or 103 but to my knowledge no one makes a filter that size-- tho we may offer clears and pola's in that size from Schneider.

We appreciate you comments and they re-enforce our feelings that going forward we need to pay more attention to the filtering options on our accessories than we have in the past.

Bill Turner
Century Division
Schneider Optics
 
Re: UV Filter for the Century .6 Wide Adapter?

Bill-- Thanks for jumping in and giving us Century's perspective.  I have a few suggestions for future products.  1) Include *some* sort of filtration option, even if it isn't very convenient--at least there's an option.  2) Either include or offer a lens hood with accessory lenses, preferably something that doesn't take up the front filter threads (bayonet or slip on or an integral part of the barrel), and 3) Include a protective pouch for the lens (I don't mind paying a little bit extra for a neoprene or hard case that protects the lens).  Thanks for listening.
 
Re: UV Filter for the Century .6 Wide Adapter?

Also why wouldnt century make the UV filter or clear glass that size. If it doesnt exsist than you have cornered the market. It is obvious the issue is more about protection for the lense, why not offer the solution.

Thank You
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top