XUME Magnetic Filter Mounts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I saw these when I was at the Photoplus Expo...

Home Page

Very simply idea - one ring mounts on the lens, one on the filter, magnets hold them together making it incredibly easy to pop the filter off and, if you want, put a different one on. For someone like me who likes to use a 9-stop ND filter this makes things so much easier in terms of popping the filter off for metering and recomposition (I find myself partially screwing the thing on and off and have had many a moment where my heart lept out of my chest as an expensive filter almost fell into running water or onto rocks. The magnets are fairly strong and I'd almost be comfortable walking around with it on my camera while it hands on my side, but I'm convinced a good knock would pry it loose, with or without my knowledge. The reps there assured me otherwise.
Cons, or at least potential cons?

1. Other than the possibility of it getting knocked off, apparently a lens cap will not mount to the lens when the lens-side magnet ring is on, so you either have to take it off all the time, mount the cap to the filter on the other end (making it susceptible to getting knocked off as mentioned) or buy a separate ring for the cap and leave it permanently attached and always use the magnetic attachment.

2. It pushes the filter out another couple millimeters which, they admit, may cause vignetting on lenses that do not have a lot of play in that area, and specifically with wide angle zooms at the wide end. The guy I spoke with told me that 95% of their returns are because of this and not for any other reason.

My brother, always the thinking, told them what they should have done differently to allow the mount to be closer to the lens front (essentially a step-up ring design without requiring the step-up), to which they countered that it would squash their ability to co-exist with a lot of lens hoods. Point taken.

Anyway, I liked it enough and feel I'd find it useful enough that I've ordered one 77mm set specifically for use with my ND. For those of you who use a clear/UV filter for protect who would like to be able to pop it off more easily and frequent when actually shooting this might provide a great option. If I had a full spectrum converted IR camera I'm thinking this would be a perfect way to swap between the various filters required on that. Not cheap, but very utilitarian.
 
Last edited:

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I saw these when I was at the Photoplus Expo...

Home Page
The big selling point for me with this product is how it would spell and end to struggling to remove a filter that's been over-tightened. Yes, I know it could get stuck on the adapter, but I'm referring to it being stuck on the lens, obviously, which is a little different. I mention this only because someone else would have felt compelled to point it out, had I not done so myself.


Not cheap, but very utilitarian.
It's not cheap but I'd be concerned, frankly, if it was "too cheap", you know?

....
 

PapaST

Senior Member
I like the idea because it will dramatically reduce the amount of times you screw-on and screw-off a filter. That's important to me because every time you do so is an opportunity to cross-thread the lens. When I'm in the field trying to change or add a filter I'm usually rushed and holding different items so I'm not exactly giving 100% attention to carefully threading the filter. I think I've already mucked up the threads on my 16-35mm.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I like the idea because it will dramatically reduce the amount of times you screw-on and screw-off a filter. That's important to me because every time you do so is an opportunity to cross-thread the lens. When I'm in the field trying to change or add a filter I'm usually rushed and holding different items so I'm not exactly giving 100% attention to carefully threading the filter. I think I've already mucked up the threads on my 16-35mm.

Absolutely. And for those of us who actually have to wear gloves in the winter it's even more significant.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I received my rings last night, a pair of 77mm rings. I mounted them on both the 16-35mm f4 and the 24-120mm f4. Both lenses have a 4mm deep UV filter on them, about the same depth as my ND400 filter, and about the same depth as the combined XUME rings. So, with the rings and filter the filter edge is ~8mm from the end of the lens. On both lenses at minimum zoom there is vignetting.

I took a series of photos as follows...

1. As normal with UV filter in place
2. No filter
3. XUME Lens mounted ring only
4. Both XUME rings together, no filter
5. XUME rings with UV filter at minimum zoom range (i.e. 16mm & 24mm)
6. XUME rings with UV filter at minimum zoom range with no vignetting

Instead of posting a ton of photos I will simply post shots 5 & 6 for each since the rest show no signs of vignetting.

16-35mm at 16mm

16-35mm - 05 Full Filter 16mm.jpg
(pardon the tile on the edge)

16-35mm at 24mm

16-35mm - 06 Full Filter 24mm.jpg


24-120mm at 24mm
24-120mm - 05 Full Filter 24mm.jpg



24-120mm at 38mm
24-120mm - 06 Full Filter 38mm.jpg


The vignetting is much more severe than I'd expected on both lenses. I suspect that with a thinner filter it would be less obtrusive, but as is I'm thinking it's a show stopper. I could probably use it at 20mm on the 16-35 and fix the dark areas in post, but anything wider than that will lose corner detail.

A bit of a shame. I need to take a look at some of the ND shots I've done in the past and see how many are in the 16-20mm range. Losing 24mm to ~35mm on the 24-120mm isn't as big a deal since I have that on the wide angle, but still a PITA if I only have one lens with me. Going to mull this over and maybe do some more testing. I have to think that there's a way they could have gone less deep and made it work, but probably not while retaining the ability to use the lens hood.
 

TonyD315

Senior Member
I received my rings last night, a pair of 77mm rings. I mounted them on both the 16-35mm f4 and the 24-120mm f4. Both lenses have a 4mm deep UV filter on them, about the same depth as my ND400 filter, and about the same depth as the combined XUME rings. So, with the rings and filter the filter edge is ~8mm from the end of the lens. On both lenses at minimum zoom there is vignetting.

I took a series of photos as follows...

1. As normal with UV filter in place
2. No filter
3. XUME Lens mounted ring only
4. Both XUME rings together, no filter
5. XUME rings with UV filter at minimum zoom range (i.e. 16mm & 24mm)
6. XUME rings with UV filter at minimum zoom range with no vignetting

Instead of posting a ton of photos I will simply post shots 5 & 6 for each since the rest show no signs of vignetting.

16-35mm at 16mm

View attachment 123260
(pardon the tile on the edge)

16-35mm at 24mm

View attachment 123261


24-120mm at 24mm
View attachment 123262



24-120mm at 38mm
View attachment 123263


The vignetting is much more severe than I'd expected on both lenses. I suspect that with a thinner filter it would be less obtrusive, but as is I'm thinking it's a show stopper. I could probably use it at 20mm on the 16-35 and fix the dark areas in post, but anything wider than that will lose corner detail.

A bit of a shame. I need to take a look at some of the ND shots I've done in the past and see how many are in the 16-20mm range. Losing 24mm to ~35mm on the 24-120mm isn't as big a deal since I have that on the wide angle, but still a PITA if I only have one lens with me. Going to mull this over and maybe do some more testing. I have to think that there's a way they could have gone less deep and made it work, but probably not while retaining the ability to use the lens hood.

I recently came across this post on my search for information about ND filters. Aside from the other questions I still have I was wondering if you did any more testing on the XUME rings. I shoot with my 24-120 a lot and I'm looking to do more long exposure day shots, most would be at 24mm. I'd hate to lose the 24-35mm range like you said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top