ND Fader limitations. at DVinfo.net

Clive McLaughlin · July 19th, 2015, 05:47 PM

Sometimes I wonder 'Does everyone else work like I do?'. And I'm just going to ask.
ND faders to keep focus somewhat shallow? Is this what you all do?

The reason I ask is that on super sunny days I've found my image to have 'crossing' from my ND faders being pushed too far.

Should I buy super expensive ND faders (which is a pain if I change lenses down the line? Or do we just accept we cant shoot at f2.8 on the sunniest days?

Does anyone bump up the shutter speed? I've always stuck hard and fast to the double the frame rate rule. But maybe it's not that critical? I've never actually tested it.

Share your wisdom/experiences!

Steve Burkett · July 19th, 2015, 11:03 PM

Crossed black lines are common to most variable nds, but I have to say, I can push mine pretty well to the limit and get 1.8 on a bright sunny day without pushing up shutter speed. Mind you I paid I think £300 for the filter. I use to use a cheaper one and colour shifting and limits on how far you could push it were common issues.

As for the shutter rule, I think you'd find many here regularly break it. I'm not one of them. I did experiment with one Wedding after comments here, of breaking the shutter rule. I did wonder if I was being too inflexible in following it so religiously. However when I saw the footage, I was not impressed. It reminded me of GoPro footage, which frankly could use an nd filter on it when outside. Motion wasn't smooth but jerky, not by a huge margin, but enough to make me glad I didn't shoot the whole day that way. It can look like stop motion if you're not careful.

Really it comes down to preference, ease of work on the day. The rule exists for a reason, but if its the difference between getting the shot or not, then you'd be foolish to follow it.

Adrian Tan · July 20th, 2015, 12:03 AM

Hey Clive, I'm happy to break the shutter rule, but that's down to my peculiar way of shooting, and also local factors. Pretty much the only time I'm shooting outside is congratulations after church and photoshoot. I shoot entire photoshoot slow motion, so high shutter speed is actually a plus if I ever need to interpolate more frames. As for congratulations after church, I personally think high shutter suits the mood -- action, excitement, etc after the stationary ceremony. Everything else during the day I can usually shoot at normal shutter and wide open.

As for outdoor ceremonies, I'm happy to increase shutter there as well to get shallow depth. Not much movement anyway.

I've found ND filters a pain for many reasons, and after I dropped a $400 Heliopan after rushing to put it on, that was it -- no more vari unless I have to.

Peter Rush · July 20th, 2015, 01:13 AM

I broke my Genius ND fader last year and earlier this season went without but did not like the crazy shutter speeds I had to endure when the sun came out so I've now bought a good ND4 filter that I use on sunny days that allows me to keep the shutter down around 100/200 without having to stop down too much and when it's cloudy, down to 50 - only problem is remembering to take it off when going indoors :/

Colin Rowe · July 20th, 2015, 06:24 AM

Sorry, wrong thread

Daniel Latimer · July 20th, 2015, 09:35 AM

I will break the shutter rule. I have ND filters and will use them sometimes, but usually I'll will forgo putting them on and increase the shutter speed. I can definitely see the motion cadence is different, but it's an aesthetic that I don't mind having in my wedding films.

Clive McLaughlin · July 21st, 2015, 07:25 AM

I just can't fathom spending £300 on an ND fader when it's locked to a certain thread size. Selling them on can't be as easy as selling on a lens.

It's a weird time us Sony A7s users are in.

Most of us hoping that we will get what we need in Sony E Mount lenses sooner rather than later.

So I don't expect to be on my Canon lenses anymore this time next year. So forking out for ND faders only t likely sell them on seems not worth it.

I'll try to do some tests with shutter speed and see if I can live with it!

Steve Burkett · July 21st, 2015, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clive McLaughlin

I just can't fathom spending £300 on an ND fader when it's locked to a certain thread size. Selling them on can't be as easy as selling on a lens.

Mine is 77mm thread and I have a step up ring from 58mm to 77mm, which my 12-35mm and 75mm lens has. I have another step up ring that covers 52mm up to 58mm, which my 42.5 has. As they're the only outdoor lenses I use - I could use the 35-100, which is also 58mm. So one filter covers it all. No need to sell it - its far too useful for that.

Craig McKenna · July 21st, 2015, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

Mine is 77mm thread and I have a step up ring from 58mm to 77mm, which my 12-35mm and 75mm lens has. I have another step up ring that covers 52mm up to 58mm, which my 42.5 has. As they're the only outdoor lenses I use - I could use the 35-100, which is also 58mm. So one filter covers it all. No need to sell it - its far too useful for that.

Which brand did you go with, Steve?

I can see from your lenses that you shoot M4/3! :D

I am considering getting a native ND for my 40-150. The way I see it is, if it is really sunny, I can confine myself to using that lens alone and shoot with it on a tripod. This seems like an obvious fix, as I ran into this issue on my last wedding, and shot at f/22. As you're most likely aware, this isn't something that's recommended to do on a M4/3 camera for diffraction and other reasons.

Usually I shoot 75 on a monpod or tripod... though I find myself going to the tripod for that focal length.

Steve Burkett · July 21st, 2015, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig McKenna

Which brand did you go with, Steve?

This one: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/851445-REG/Schneider_68_031177_77mm_True_Match_Vari_ND_Filter.html

Peter Rush · July 21st, 2015, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clive McLaughlin

I just can't fathom spending £300 on an ND fader when it's locked to a certain thread size. Selling them on can't be as easy as selling on a lens.

It's a weird time us Sony A7s users are in.

Most of us hoping that we will get what we need in Sony E Mount lenses sooner rather than later.

So I don't expect to be on my Canon lenses anymore this time next year. So forking out for ND faders only t likely sell them on seems not worth it.

I'll try to do some tests with shutter speed and see if I can live with it!

Clive don't hold your breath for good E-Mount lenses - I've just bought the Zeiss 24-70 FE lens for my A7 and am most underwhelmed - I bought it mainly for autofocus that is crucial at certain parts of the day, as at the moment I swap lenses too much - it does it's job but it's waaay overpriced and somehow the image is meh compared to my 24-70 Tamron which was actually a little cheaper. At F4 it's too expensive - I paid £500 second hand and if i had paid the grand retail I would have sent it back - Also the Sony (not even Zeiss badged) 28 - 135 F4 is just shy of 2 grand - again I know it's parcfocal (My Tamron and Canon lenses are technically not but over a short zoom sure act as though they are) and a cinema lens but if the quality is the same as the Zeiss again it's way overpriced. For the price of both these E-mount lenses they should be 2.8 as F4 is still too slow even on the A7s - when it goes dark out comes my Tamron 2.8

I'm still lens swapping :(

Steve Bleasdale · July 21st, 2015, 01:33 PM

Not used a ND fitter for years just adjust shutter speed you get a nice staccato effect,,,

Clive McLaughlin · July 21st, 2015, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Rush

Clive don't hold your breath for good E-Mount lenses - I've just bought the Zeiss 24-70 FE lens for my A7 and am most underwhelmed - I bought it mainly for autofocus that is crucial at certain parts of the day, as at the moment I swap lenses too much - it does it's job but it's waaay overpriced and somehow the image is meh compared to my 24-70 Tamron which was actually a little cheaper. At F4 it's too expensive - I paid £500 second hand and if i had paid the grand retail I would have sent it back - Also the Sony (not even Zeiss badged) 28 - 135 F4 is just shy of 2 grand - again I know it's parcfocal (My Tamron and Canon lenses are technically not but over a short zoom sure act as though they are) and a cinema lens but if the quality is the same as the Zeiss again it's way overpriced. For the price of both these E-mount lenses they should be 2.8 as F4 is still too slow even on the A7s - when it goes dark out comes my Tamron 2.8

I'm still lens swapping :(

Peter - it's like you are reading my mind!

In my last post I was about to mention my Tamron 24-70 but in the end didn't.

My Tamron 24-70 is beginning to have problems. Its broken but still usable if you tweak it right. Repair bill will be a few hundred, and so I had a look at native glass. f4 just doesn't cut it for me.

I'm fed up with my Metabones. As mentioned before it give odd lens reflections for me, and sometimes it doesn't 'read' the lens through the electronic contacts unless you really crank it hard when mounting the lens!

Sony are smashing barriers in the sensor world but are nowhere near up to the same level on their glass. I was hoping this would change soon...

Peter Rush · July 22nd, 2015, 03:22 AM

I have the metabones speedbooster I use for my Canon 24-105mm F4 (goes to 2.8) for ceremonies and speeches - it puts the A7s into APS-C mode but I'm fine with that as it gives me more reach at the zoom end, and at the evening reception I use the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 with the metabones Smart Adapter becuase it's faster than the Zeiss - I have to admit I have no issues with Metabones but still feel I swap lenses too much - it adds stress.

i notice you can send the smart adapter back to metabones for it to be upgraded for autofocus. If that works as well as the native E-Mount lenses I'm sold - I could have the Tamron on pretty much all day - I think I'd be happy with that but no way can I do that in the middle of the season.

July 19th, 2015, 05:47 PM	#1
Clive McLaughlin Major Player Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Belfast Posts: 823	ND Fader limitations. Sometimes I wonder 'Does everyone else work like I do?'. And I'm just going to ask. ND faders to keep focus somewhat shallow? Is this what you all do? The reason I ask is that on super sunny days I've found my image to have 'crossing' from my ND faders being pushed too far. Should I buy super expensive ND faders (which is a pain if I change lenses down the line? Or do we just accept we cant shoot at f2.8 on the sunniest days? Does anyone bump up the shutter speed? I've always stuck hard and fast to the double the frame rate rule. But maybe it's not that critical? I've never actually tested it. Share your wisdom/experiences!

July 19th, 2015, 11:03 PM	#2
Steve Burkett Trustee Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Romsey, UK Posts: 1,261	Re: ND Fader limitations. Crossed black lines are common to most variable nds, but I have to say, I can push mine pretty well to the limit and get 1.8 on a bright sunny day without pushing up shutter speed. Mind you I paid I think £300 for the filter. I use to use a cheaper one and colour shifting and limits on how far you could push it were common issues. As for the shutter rule, I think you'd find many here regularly break it. I'm not one of them. I did experiment with one Wedding after comments here, of breaking the shutter rule. I did wonder if I was being too inflexible in following it so religiously. However when I saw the footage, I was not impressed. It reminded me of GoPro footage, which frankly could use an nd filter on it when outside. Motion wasn't smooth but jerky, not by a huge margin, but enough to make me glad I didn't shoot the whole day that way. It can look like stop motion if you're not careful. Really it comes down to preference, ease of work on the day. The rule exists for a reason, but if its the difference between getting the shot or not, then you'd be foolish to follow it.

July 20th, 2015, 12:03 AM	#3
Adrian Tan Trustee Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 1,149	Re: ND Fader limitations. Hey Clive, I'm happy to break the shutter rule, but that's down to my peculiar way of shooting, and also local factors. Pretty much the only time I'm shooting outside is congratulations after church and photoshoot. I shoot entire photoshoot slow motion, so high shutter speed is actually a plus if I ever need to interpolate more frames. As for congratulations after church, I personally think high shutter suits the mood -- action, excitement, etc after the stationary ceremony. Everything else during the day I can usually shoot at normal shutter and wide open. As for outdoor ceremonies, I'm happy to increase shutter there as well to get shallow depth. Not much movement anyway. I've found ND filters a pain for many reasons, and after I dropped a $400 Heliopan after rushing to put it on, that was it -- no more vari unless I have to.

July 20th, 2015, 01:13 AM	#4
Peter Rush Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: UK/Yorkshire Posts: 2,069	Re: ND Fader limitations. I broke my Genius ND fader last year and earlier this season went without but did not like the crazy shutter speeds I had to endure when the sun came out so I've now bought a good ND4 filter that I use on sunny days that allows me to keep the shutter down around 100/200 without having to stop down too much and when it's cloudy, down to 50 - only problem is remembering to take it off when going indoors :/

July 20th, 2015, 06:24 AM	#5
Colin Rowe Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Cornwall UK Posts: 793	Re: ND Fader limitations. Sorry, wrong thread __________________ Colin

July 20th, 2015, 09:35 AM	#6
Daniel Latimer Major Player Join Date: May 2012 Location: Nashua, NH Posts: 209	Re: ND Fader limitations. I will break the shutter rule. I have ND filters and will use them sometimes, but usually I'll will forgo putting them on and increase the shutter speed. I can definitely see the motion cadence is different, but it's an aesthetic that I don't mind having in my wedding films.

July 21st, 2015, 07:25 AM	#7
Clive McLaughlin Major Player Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Belfast Posts: 823	Re: ND Fader limitations. I just can't fathom spending £300 on an ND fader when it's locked to a certain thread size. Selling them on can't be as easy as selling on a lens. It's a weird time us Sony A7s users are in. Most of us hoping that we will get what we need in Sony E Mount lenses sooner rather than later. So I don't expect to be on my Canon lenses anymore this time next year. So forking out for ND faders only t likely sell them on seems not worth it. I'll try to do some tests with shutter speed and see if I can live with it!

July 21st, 2015, 01:33 PM	#12
Steve Bleasdale Trustee Join Date: May 2010 Location: England liverpool Posts: 1,343	Re: ND Fader limitations. Not used a ND fitter for years just adjust shutter speed you get a nice staccato effect,,,

July 22nd, 2015, 03:22 AM	#14
Peter Rush Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: UK/Yorkshire Posts: 2,069	Re: ND Fader limitations. I have the metabones speedbooster I use for my Canon 24-105mm F4 (goes to 2.8) for ceremonies and speeches - it puts the A7s into APS-C mode but I'm fine with that as it gives me more reach at the zoom end, and at the evening reception I use the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 with the metabones Smart Adapter becuase it's faster than the Zeiss - I have to admit I have no issues with Metabones but still feel I swap lenses too much - it adds stress. i notice you can send the smart adapter back to metabones for it to be upgraded for autofocus. If that works as well as the native E-Mount lenses I'm sold - I could have the Tamron on pretty much all day - I think I'd be happy with that but no way can I do that in the middle of the season.