Matte box advantages

[Peter Majtan]

The step-downs to 77mm work great, until you buy the 16-35 (which I just did), which is 82mm - so now I would have to buy all the filters in 82mm.
Also - I frequently rent some of the larger telephoto formats, like the 400mm, 600mm, etc...

Screw-in filters are good option - but matte-box with trays is the way to go forward, if You are serious about building your own filter bank...

Peter

[Erik Naso]

The step-downs to 77mm work great, until you buy the 16-35 (which I just did), which is 82mm - so now I would have to buy all the filters in 82mm.
Also - I frequently rent some of the larger telephoto formats, like the 400mm, 600mm, etc...

Screw-in filters are good option - but matte-box with trays is the way to go forward, if You are serious about building your own filter bank...

Peter

Those 82mm's always ruin a good party! :)

[PatrickFaith]

I think Matte Boxe's are nice, but I use my c-stand with flags like "always" with the lights(i sometimes have up to 3 flags per light). Mandatory flags are silk, one stop down, two stop downs (i use a large silk as my reflector). I really like the Matthew c-stands, as far as matt boxes i use the o-box, but it's off 90% of the time, while I almost always have some type of filter going with the lights. For low budget guys like me, matte boxes and stuff can really add up $ ... but you get way more bang for you buck on on stand/flag kit ... perty good one is under 1k. My "money" priority is camera, lens, lights, dual system sound, mic, flags/stands, jib, dolly, remote follow focus ... then the cool bits.

[Jonas Klittmark]

Those 82mm's always ruin a good party! :)

My Zeiss 21mm is 82 as well but I just step it down to 77. On 4K that setup does not vignette at all (and with a single ultra-thin filter it actually does not even vignette on the 5D).

[Mitch Fillion]

I prefer just to use a variable ND. I don't see any reason for owning a matte-box in my opinion. My cousin owns one but all I've ever heard him say about it is "you should get one , it makes your camera look bad ass" haha

[Peter Majtan]

My Zeiss 21mm is 82 as well but I just step it down to 77. On 4K that setup does not vignette at all (and with a single ultra-thin filter it actually does not even vignette on the 5D).

This is rather an exception then a rule. The 16-35 would vignette this way even without the filter...

[Peter Majtan]

I prefer just to use a variable ND. I don't see any reason for owning a matte-box in my opinion. My cousin owns one but all I've ever heard him say about it is "you should get one , it makes your camera look bad ass" haha

Mitch - no offense to you amd your friend, but this is a perfect example of someone who has no clue about the purpose of a matte-box (or other cine accessories for that matter) making a silly comment like that and other therefore dismissing that accessory as well. This is one of the side-effects of the DSLR "revolution". Putting large budget productions aside I see essential accessories (like matte-boxes, light-meters, etc) disappearing from sets along with the knowledge about their purpose and mode of use. I won't be surprised to see a pro TVC in couple of years being shot on a iPhone 7...

Rant off... ;o)

Peter

[Gunleik Groven]

Matteboxes = fun, easy, fast, effective, versatile

Screw-ins + hacks will get you the images, but you'll spend more time clumsing around.
+ you get the actual mattes in addition to flags etc.

Thus:
A good matte is better for a pro working environment
Whether it makes you "look pro" is up to how good you are at handling it... :)

[Jonas Klittmark]

This is rather an exception then a rule. The 16-35 would vignette this way even without the filter...

Have you tried it? I doubt it would on 4K. On FF, yes, but who cares.

[Peter Majtan]

Have you tried it? I doubt it would on 4K. On FF, yes, but who cares.

I do. I shoot a ton of timelapses at FF 5K... ;o)