Filters

DigiEyE

:scratch:scratch:scratch Im just not sure where to start when it comes to lens filters. Ive read about some of them, but the selection is overwhelming for myself. Whats a good set to start with or maybe a place that will explain them in laymens terms?

Art Scott

Cokin and Tiffen both used to publish books on filters.
Barns and Noble and Borders are some of the greatest libraires around...inconjunction with your public library.


Filters are truly subjective and so much can be done in Photoshop to emulate the use of many filters....
So without know exactly what you are looking for, it makes it real hard for any one to give good answers.

Antonio Correia

http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/cokin-p-versus-lee-grad-nd-filters.html?source=rss
Is this link of any use to you ?

devbobo

this might be a good place to start....

Scott_Quier

DigiEyE wrote:

Whats a good set to start with or maybe a place that will explain them in laymens terms?

It may seem a little simplistic, but one good place to start is with a good circular polarizer (CP), or set of, that will fit on all your lenses. They have so many applications that you can not afford to leave home without them.

What has worked well for me is to get one large enough to cover all my lenses and then use a step-up ring to mount it on the smaller diameter lenses. This works well for all but your wide-angle lenses. If you do this for them, you can get some viginetting. In that instance, get a slim CP for this lens. Bonus points awarded if it also fits other lenses.

claudermilk

Generally for digital, you really should only be looking at polarizers and maybe UV. The effects of the color-correction (or effects) filters can be reproduced in the computer now. The gimmick filters can as well, and you save a bunch of money that way.

Nikolai

All you need is ...
1. UV/protection
This filter protects your lens and make it easier on the sensor if you shoot under bright sun (where there is a lot of UltaViolet emission from the sun - mountains, marinas). One thing - make sure it's not a slim/thin one (i.e. you want outside thread), otherwise you'd have to take it off each time you would like to use ND/CP, which is a) a hassle b) lens exposure..
This type of filter stays on your lens ALL the time, so pick up one that matches your lens thread.

2. ND (Neutral Density)
This filter is generally used to slow the shutter speed (ubiquitous "silky water" effect, and such:-). There are also "split" (half is dark, half is bright) and "grad" (continuous variation from dark to bright) to get "darker" skies effect (if you have no idea why would you need one or how to use it - don't buy it for now:-).
They differ by the "darkness factor". If I had to choose one I'd start with NDx8 (0.9) and see if I like it...

3. CP (Circular Polarizer)
This one is virtually impossible to replace with the post processing, since it does affect the light coming to your sensor in a unique way. Two the most known and widely used effects are:
a) naturally darker skies and overall "nicer" colors. Also "cuts through" fog/haze to a degree
b) reflection control: you can "see through" the glass windows OR enhance reflection from the water surface.
It is generally not recommended to use CP on the wide-angle lenses since it creates a very distinctive dark zone on the image.

Important
Unlike UV, ND and CP are specialty filters that you do not normally use all the time. They also tend to be more (sometimes WAY more) expensive. While this is not a problem for a fixed-lens cameras, for (d)SLRs it can be cost prohibitive. Imagine having half a dozen different thread sizes, and your simple desire to have a pair of decent ND and CP (about a $100 each) turns into a major financial goal...:-(
One way to solve this problem is to purchase just one ND and one CP for the largest thread size you (plan to) have and then buy a bunch of the step-up rings for all the rest. The rings are all about $4..$8 each, and if you buy them all at once the shipping will be negligible.

Since CP/ND is usually the last filter in your filter chain, you can buy slim/thin version (without extra thread). Keep in mind they tend to be more expensive and require they own cover, which is one more little thing to keep/take care of/lose/etc.

Bottom line
All you need is (at first):

• medium-to-low priced UV filter (non-slim/thin) for each lens you have
• one CP (max thread size)
• one or two ND (max thread size, start with x8)
• step up rings for each smaller thread size you (plan to) have (not for each lens of that size - just for each size)

HTH

Antonio Correia

Nikolai.
You are a master.
Expert.
I have the neutral density which I have used with success.
I had neutral filter on my lenses but I noticed that it caused flare. I took them out and they are at home. The lens are naked.
The polarized filter: I use Ray Ban Polarizing glasses. So all the familly. Grey. Grade 3 or 4, I don't remember, the ones you can drive with.

Your post suggested I should get a polarizing filter for thr 70~200. It would be great on the beach with those effects of "seeing" throught the water reflexes...
This is a good ideia is it not ? I would buy one from Canon. Circular of course.
Thank you Nikolai.

DigiEyE

Thanks a million times guys for your responses! My mind has been cleared (for the most part) of headaches and confusion. Im prob gonna run out this week and work on getting some of these lenses. Ill let you guys know what I went with.

Nikolai

Antonio,

Antonio Correia wrote:

Nikolai.
You are a master.
Expert.
I have the neutral density which I have used with success.
I had neutral filter on my lenses but I noticed that it caused flare. I took them out and they are at home. The lens are naked.
The polarized filter: I use Ray Ban Polarizing glasses. So all the familly. Grey. Grade 3 or 4, I don't remember, the ones you can drive with.

Your post suggested I should get a polarizing filter for thr 70~200. It would be great on the beach with those effects of "seeing" throught the water reflexes...
This is a good ideia is it not ? I would buy one from Canon. Circular of course.
Thank you Nikolai.

Thank you, you're too kind. :-) Glad you found my "filters 101" helpful. :

Yes, I think CP on 70-200 would be great (in some cases, at least:-). I have my 77mm B+W CP ready for it:-). I would keep it on it all the times but...

The problem with long teles and CPs is that usually you use those lenses with the hood on. And those CPs are very hard to rotate inside them long narrow tele hoods :-(. So you either have to lose the hood (or revert it, and cripple your access to manual focusing ring) and be ready for a nice flare -- or it will make you very, very slow. Not good, especially on the beach, where the kids and surfers (and all those pretty, scantily clad girls : ) move in all directions fast...
I'm not saying tele+CP is a bad combo. You simply need to be ready for this.

I saw some manufactureres (was it sigma? I don't remeber) even started to produce special hoods with CP assistant (a rubberized wheel that can help you to rotate the CP ring from the outside). Unfortunately, I didn't see anything like that for Canon..:-(

Good luck!

Antonio Correia

It is funny because I was just going to ask you to answer me, I went to see the mail and you had answered...

Antonio Correia

I think the issue is easy:
Never rotate the filter.
In other words: shoot always in the same position: landscape.
Like this - and once the filter is oriented - all the pictures will be OK using the lenshood.
How about that ?
And, as I have all lens L = 16~35 - 24-70 - 70~200 I am done about the polarizer.
Unless, unless, I want to shoot with the 2 cameras at the same time and location. There I'would have to get 2 filters at least ...
Not the case. I'm rich but not that much !

But there are CP from Canon I suppose ...

USAIR

Just a few links to add to the mix

First site under renovation so check back
Cokin USA
Cokin Filter System
Filter Connection
Tiffen

Fred

Antonio Correia

USAIR wrote:

Just a few links to add to the mix

First site under renovation so check back
Cokin USA
Cokin Filter System
Filter Connection
Tiffen

Fred

thumb

Nikolai

It's not that simple..

Antonio Correia wrote:

I think the issue is easy:
Never rotate the filter.
In other words: shoot always in the same position: landscape.

With polarizers it's not just a landscape/portrait.
You need to rotate them according to what angle is currently between you and the sun. Many of them have a dot on the ring that you are supposed to move towards the sun. Hence, if you simply start shooting in an different direction (kid/boat/surfer/girl passed you by:-)) you will need to adjust the orientation of the CP . Which, as I mentioned, can be pretty tricky with the hood on... Does not mean much if the sun is in zenith (or very close to it), but deinitely means something if you're shooting early morning/late afternoon sweetlight

I think the difference between the CPs and your polarized glasses (I have similar ones, and I swear by them:-) is that glasses use linearly polarized optics. This allows them to keep the effect regardless of which side of the compass you look (as long as you don't tint your head, in which case you will immediately get a very strong yellow or blue tint). Digital cameras do not work with linear polarizers due to an inherent problem in their AF systems (or so I read ), hence they use CPs, which, in their turn, require orientation at the sun...

Just my thoughts...

Art Scott

I agree with Nik on which filters to look at first...but I would look at it this way.......which lens in the present or future will have the largest filter size........mine will probably be the Sigma 10 - 20 (m i now have my lens list down to 3 lens all sigma...70-210 f2.8, 24 - 70 f2.8 and 10-20...other than that a couple of extenders and a set of extension tubes and I am fully loaded and ready for most anything)....ok so mine will be 82 mm (for the 24-70) and 77mm for both the 70 -210 and the 10-20)......

I could buy 2 sets of everything or buy 3 adapter rings and holders and 1 set of Cokin filters.....Cokin has an excellent reputation and You will have a lot less invested this way...those adapter rings and filter holders are much less expensive than the filters are.
Cokin has CP filters and also IR(infra red) filters also.....
If not mistaken cokin also has a shade that attaches to the filter holder to kill that flare problem.....in my film days I had a large shade that held vignettes and montage filters that I used for a sunshade...worked great.


just my 2 Kc worth.

TylerW

If you already have a circular polarizer, is there any reason to own a set of gradient filters? Clearly the polarizer seems more versatile for balancing sky to ground, but is there any situation where the gradient would produce a better result?

Nikolai

Depends on what you're doing

TylerW wrote:

If you already have a circular polarizer, is there any reason to own a set of gradient filters? Clearly the polarizer seems more versatile for balancing sky to ground, but is there any situation where the gradient would produce a better result?

Yes, using split or grad filter can save you some time in PS. However (and very strictly IMHO), shooting RAW (+ optionally bracketing with 1.3..2EV) will give you pretty much same results for free and with much less hassle. It's not that hard to blend those shots later.

Unlike CP, split/grad results can usually be reproduced in post (at least with RAWs).. Of course, with no RAW, no bracketing and no sturdy tripod those filters can be your only option to get a nice dark sky while keeping the ground not in a pitch black zone.

HTH

claudermilk

One thought. If you are spending big bucks on lenses, like Antonio is don't cheap out on filters (like Tiffen, Cokin). So, after spending $1500+ on a lens, why balk at $100 for a top-quality filter? I did find a deal on B+W and Hoya filters at www.maxsaver.net . I'll be sticking to B+W, Hoya, and Heliopan in front of my L glass.

Antonio Correia

Who has experienced a polarizing filter on the 70~200 mm ?
Which were the results ?
Which specif brand ?
Thank you.

Antonio Correia

Nikolai wrote:

Yes, using split or grad filter can save you some time in PS. However (and very strictly IMHO), shooting RAW (+ optionally bracketing with 1.3..2EV) will give you pretty much same results for free and with much less hassle. It's not that hard to blend those shots later.

Unlike CP, split/grad results can usually be reproduced in post (at least with RAWs).. Of course, with no RAW, no bracketing and no sturdy tripod those filters can be your only option to get a nice dark sky while keeping the ground not in a pitch black zone.

HTH

Nikolai.
Here comes another one to you my friend, the expert (NOT pulling your leg !)
Instead of shooting with bracketing I shoot to the right (I do not like nor the right nor the left, they look the same to me. In politics I mean), and for the hight lights.
Then, in Photoshop I adjust the 2 RAW windows - one for the shadows and another for the lights - and stack one picture over the other, masking etc. etc.
How about that ?
The problem is that sometimes there scenes which can not be bracketed like people moving...

Nikolai

Antonio,

Antonio Correia wrote:

Nikolai.
Here comes another one to you my friend, the expert (NOT pulling your leg !)
Instead of shooting with bracketing I shoot to the right (I do not like nor the right nor the left, they look the same to me. In politics I mean), and for the hight lights.
Then, in Photoshop I adjust the 2 RAW windows - one for the shadows and another for the lights - and stack one picture over the other, masking etc. etc.
How about that ?
The problem is that sometimes there scenes which can not be bracketed like people moving...

You mean, you do bracketing manually?

And yes, just one RAW file allows to "develop" it for different exposures. However, sometimes it does make sense to take a cople more shots with adjusted/bracketed exposures to increase that range even further.

You can usually decide if there is a need for bracketing by checking your histogram. If all your data lies in the middle with a lot of empty space along the sides you'll definitely gain something from bracketing (manual or not)

Of course, it's not an option with the moving subjects...:-)

Cheers!

Antonio Correia

Nikolai
Thank you.
Yes I do the braketing manually.
Yes, that is the main ideia.
Yours is correct too.
I am uploading 3 pics I photoshoped I'll post them later.
Be well.

Antonio Correia

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=333579&posted=1#post333579
Please go and have a look.

DigiEyE

Ok so i went out to B&H (Im located in NYC) armed with the information from everyone that posted here. I was really surprised how expensive these filters are...most of them where $200 or more. Is this normal or is there a better place for me to purchase my lenses...

Nikolai

Pricegrabber & Froogle are your friends!

DigiEyE wrote:

Ok so i went out to B&H (Im located in NYC) armed with the information from everyone that posted here. I was really surprised how expensive these filters are...most of them where $200 or more. Is this normal or is there a better place for me to purchase my lenses...

I have been purchasing my NDs/CPs at ~$100 (B+W) and my UVs at $30..50 (Hoya). Usually from Adorama (I like their search filtering system, and trheir prices are usually very competitive), but I *always* check the prices in several reliable places first.
B&H looks like an awesome brick-and-mortar store, but you can't beat "the internets":):

HTH

claudermilk

I think I mentioned earlier in the thread I've used www.maxsaver.net for my B+W filters. Nearly half the price, you just have to wait for it to ship from Taiwan.

Nikolai

Wow!

claudermilk wrote:

I think I mentioned earlier in the thread I've used www.maxsaver.net for my B+W filters. Nearly half the price, you just have to wait for it to ship from Taiwan.

Nice prices, man! Really nice! Thanks for the link!

DigiEyE

Those prices are much better then what I was dealing with, thanks for that info! :

@Nikolai - Im not sure what you meant when you stated
"step up rings for each smaller thread size you (plan to) have (not for each lens of that size - just for each size)"

I found this B+W Filter, Im not sure how to find out its thickness tho?
http://shop.vendio.com/hkd/item/770577442/index.html

thanks again guys.

Nikolai

DigiEye,

DigiEyE wrote:

@Nikolai - Im not sure what you meant when you stated
"step up rings for each smaller thread size you (plan to) have (not for each lens of that size - just for each size)"

I meant the following: if you have (or plan to have) two lenses with 56mm thread, three lenses with 62mm thread and two with 77mm, all you need is:

• one 77mm filter of each type, e.g. one CP, one ND, etc.
• one 56-to-77 step-up ring
• one 62-to-77 step-up ring

Plus, of course, a UV filter for each lens (2x56 + 3x62 + 2x77, total 7 UVs)

DigiEyE wrote:

I found this B+W Filter, Im not sure how to find out its thickness tho?
http://shop.vendio.com/hkd/item/770577442/index.html

Since it does not say anything to the extent of "thin", "slim", etc. you can rest assured that it's a regular dual-threaded one.
Please make a note that this is a graduated ND filter, not just a plain vanilla regular ND.

HTH

System

B + W's filter handbook PDF