ND filters..anything i should know before xmas ?

gus

I have saved & revived a lot of beetles from the pool over the past few months & santa has granted me a few bob in my skyrocket at the local camera shop for good karma.

I really dont want anything (hows that for contentment) but i really need some help in reducing the light i have to deal with here.

Im thinking off several 77mm ND for the 10-22 (also fits the 400) as well as a 72mm ND for the 135. This im ok with.

So the question is will i also need a half/half ND filter to allow me to filter some sky when i use the 10-22 for landscapes ??

Gus

Andy

Humungus wrote:

I have saved & revived a lot of beetles from the pool over the past few months & santa has granted me a few bob in my skyrocket at the local camera shop for good karma.

I really dont want anything (hows that for contentment) but i really need some help in reducing the light i have to deal with here.

Im thinking off several 77mm ND for the 10-22 (also fits the 400) as well as a 72mm ND for the 135. This im ok with.

So the question is will i also need a half/half ND filter to allow me to filter some sky when i use the 10-22 for landscapes ??

Gus

buy a 72-77 mm stepping ring (about $7 usd) and you can use the 77s on the 135mm also.

I don't use ND Grads but lots like 'em

I totally dig my 10-stop ND filter - great for forcing long exposures in harsh midday sun (but it's expensive!).

gus

Andy wrote:

buy a 72-77 mm stepping ring (about $7 usd) and you can use the 77s on the 135mm also.

Now theres an idea ! Ta mate.

GraphyFotoz

Hummmmmm
That's something PPL don't figure in when they spend a lot for a fast lens...the filters they will need and the cost of them.

Man I was looking threw my Nov Outdoor Photographer found a Lee Filter Circ Polarizer PLC-105 MSRP $320!
Or a Singh-Ray Gold-N-Blue Polarizer MSRP $180-$210!!

I about messed myself!:pissed

Just can't believe the the way price of filters is going.
9-5 job just can't come close to affording that.
Unless I'm doing Professional Photo's for cash....they are way outta my league!

gus

Considering the 0z $ cost of those 3 lenses is about $4700 then i really dont see what the problem would be to drop a bit on filters for them. I had/have no issues with filter costs.....did i give you that impression ?

Buy cheap crap then expect cheap crap results.

GraphyFotoz

Humungus wrote:

Considering the 0z $ cost of those 3 lenses is about $4700 then i really dont see what the problem would be to drop a bit on filters for them. I had/have no issues with filter costs.....did i give you that impression ?

Buy cheap crap then expect cheap crap results.

No I was just pointing out where filters are headed.:uhoh
Didn't mean to start anything...was just pointing out the cost.

I don't call Hoya or B+W crap.....Tiffen these days...so so.

pathfinder

Gus - I carry a pair of B&W ND filters in 77mm diameter - an #106 ND1.8 6BL 64x and a #102 ND0.6 2BL 4x Not sure these are the best, but they're what I have and they seem to work. You saw my shots of Tahquamenon Falls in Canada. Here is a shot with one of those ND filters taken at Upper Cataract Falls in Indiana a few weeks ago.



Andy is correct that a 72-77mm step up ring is about $7 USD. Cheap, buy it. But the downside to a step up ring is that the lens hood may no longer fit, so I have some 72mm filters also for the 135 and my 180 macro.

With regard to ND gradient filters - I do not recommend screw-in ND grads. I use the rectangular ones that fit the Cokin screw in filter adapter. Singh-Ray makes a lovely ND Grad named after Galen Rowell - The one I use is the ND-2GS-SS


The reason the screw-in ND grads are not rec'd is that it is rather difficult to see the interface of the lighter and darker area looking through a vewfinder. With the rectangular filters you can move them up and down and that helps a great deal to identify where the filtration begins. With a screw-in filter you cannot do this and it can be very difficult in the dim light before sunrise figuring this out. Also, you probably DO NOT want the line of filtration dead center in your frame - you do not want the horizon dead center usually - but with a screw-in you are kinda scr.... : I read this advise somewhere a while back - I suspect in Galen Rowell's "Inner Game of Outdoor Photography" but I'm not sure - I've slept since then! But this advice is dead on - I know this form experience. Using an NG grad takes a little effort - seeing the area of change through a viewfinder closed down to f11 makes it a little more challenging.

I also like the Singh-Ray blue-gold polarizer that was mentioned above : And yes, Singh-Ray gear is NOT cheap!!

Bodwick

Humungus wrote:

Im thinking off several 77mm ND for the 10-22 (also fits the 400) as well as a 72mm ND for the 135. This im ok with.

So the question is will i also need a half/half ND filter to allow me to filter some sky when i use the 10-22 for landscapes ??

Gus

Different filters for totaly different use.

Singh-Ray are my chice of ND filter. At great cost shipped across the pond and then increased in price again paying import duty.

I went for a 1 & 2 split soft and the same in hard together with a ND split 3 reversed. That gives me ND split hard or soft 1 & 2 or 3 when stacked. Next purchase will be a 4 which when added together covers everything from 1 to 7(should that ever be needed in split).

This is a shot using a split Reversed ND 3. It's a frame from a panoramic set of 6/8 I've grabbed to use as an example as it shows the split 3 Rev. Taken at god-knows-what-o'clock around the summer solstice. It went into the bin as the tide is out etc. and it's no good other than to show you what this filter does in this instance. It show's my mooring on the river Rother at Rye (Empty due to a blown Chevy big block!).



The pole cuts into the filter and would need work as would anything that cuts through a split filter. Not a great shot and maybe 3rev is too much...


Held in a LEE holder with WA hood. Fully configurable as needed.


As for a full ND I'd go for a 2-8 stop Vari-ND. Expensive but covers evrything


You might want to try the digital method of ND filtering. Save some money on splits and just buy the variable ND 2-8..


Hope thats a bit of help.

Bod..

gus

All advice well taken & digested...thankyou all for the effort in your replies.

GraphyFotoz

Humungus wrote:

All advice well taken & digested...thankyou all for the effort in your replies.

Well forgive mine I didn't mean to come across wrong! :uhoh

photobug

Maybe try the Cokin "P" system

Humungus wrote:

Im thinking off several 77mm ND for the 10-22 (also fits the 400) as well as a 72mm ND for the 135. This im ok with.

So the question is will i also need a half/half ND filter to allow me to filter some sky when i use the 10-22 for landscapes ??

Gus,

You might consider using a filter system like the Cokin "P" system, which allow rectangular filters to slide up and down in the mount. This is important for split-ND filters so you can position the split line exactly where you want it in the composition. You can buy filters to fit it from Cokin (and others, e.g. Singh-Ray). The filter holder also allows you to combine two or more filters (e.g. ND and polarizing), if you want.

Another advantage is that the system works with any lens with filter sizes over (approx) range of 50mm to over 80mm. I use it with two lenses, one that takes a 72mm filter and the other that takes a 77mm filter. All you need to do when you get a new lens that takes a different filter size is buy a new (roughly $5) adaptor ring.

A last advantage is cost. The rectangular filters that go into the "P" system seem to be noticeably less expensive than the circular ones that come pre-mounted in screw-in filters.

You can also get square/rectangular filter systems that handle larger filters (which may be useful for very wide-angle lenses, avoiding vignetting when stacking multiple filters, and/or for lenses that take filters over 80mm diameter).

Full details at any of the major online photo sites (B&H, Adorama, etc, etc) or at cokin.com.

= Dave