ND Filters

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Jon Braeley

I still say its almost impossible to see much difference in filter quality when looking at 7D footage.

Anyway - here is the answer for this from Tiffen:

Tiffen 77MM VARIABLE ND FILTER 77VND B&H Photo Video

Well spotted! I didn't realise that Tiffen had launched a variable ND filter & at a pretty decent price too at only $64 more than the Fader ND from LCW. It's available for pre-order here in the UK & predictably at £203.99 ($334) is vastly overpriced compared to the US price even allowing for 20% VAT (Sales Tax).

Tiffen 77VND Variable Neutral Density Filter: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics

 

Tiffen 77VND Variable Neutral Density Filter: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics

[Tom Hardwick]

No mention made about the surface coating, though at that price I'd expect nothing less than a film of gold.

[Martin Campbell]

Originally Posted by Jon Braeley

I still say its almost impossible to see much difference in filter quality when looking at 7D footage.

Anyway - here is the answer for this from Tiffen:

Tiffen 77MM VARIABLE ND FILTER 77VND B&H Photo Video

thanks everyone. I like the look of the Tiffen though. I would have said no to the other variable ND filters - but Tiffen are pretty good and am sure this filter works well.............at least I hope so?!!!!

[Steve Oakley]

the filter I used was a more expensive one, a Lee. the faces are parallel enough. the problem is that plastic is acting as a low pass filter - losing high frequency detail, ie making the image softer. just because something is clear doesn't mean it can transmit high frequency information.

this also has to do with how big an area you are looking thru the filter. the higher the focal length, the smaller area you are seeing thru. imperfections / index refraction ect become more critical. if you eyes could zoom in by a factor of 5 or 10, plastic lenses wouldn't work so great.

there is one minor upside : if you are having problems with moire a resin filter can soften the image a bit and sometimes make it go away.

here is another thing - filters, even the really expensive ones aren't multicoated. maybe some cheap ones are but not anything made by tiffen or schneider

[Tom Hardwick]

Steve, you say, 'filters, even the really expensive ones aren't multicoated'. Are you serious? It's not anytime soon I plan to replace my camera's front element with an uncoated sheet of glass or plastic. If Sony or Canon thought that was a good idea they'd be saving themselves some money.

[Steve Oakley]

yup. you may find some filters with coatings on them, but almost none do. with a screw on filter, there isn't a real problem with reflections because the lens front element is coated, and there is no light leaking from the edges. however with a matte box, a light block is critical for stopping reflections from the filter.

reflections in lenses is a different matter because of all the glass involved. if you have used older glass with fewer coatings you'll see they flare much more nicely then modern glass where you have to work to get it to flare.... or put a filter in front to catch some light.

its really not that bad. however, a matte box becomes your best friend for keeping stray light off when yo don't want flares / contrast loss.

real optical glass vs common glass vs plastic makes a difference in flare characteristics too for items in the shot too.

of course then you have filters that make flare like Pro Mists which is part of their diffusion look. fog filters work great when you can flare them.

it all depends on application and desired look. its nothing to loose sleep over. in general your going to be happier with optical glass filters, especially ND's most of the time.

[Chris Joy]

I got the LCW vari-ND and I hate it. I went with the 82mm version with step down rings for all my lenses so its compatible with everything. No matter the lens, either prime (28, 35, 50, 85) or zoom (24-105, 70-200) I get that stupid X after only 3-4 stops max. So yes technically it will cut 8+ stops of light, but only 3-4 are usable. What a rip. The Genus version appears to be from the same manufacturer. I've debated trying the pricier Singh-Ray or just getting 2 or 3 Tiffen IR's that supposedly won't cut resolution or funk with color. I shoot out in bright light quite often so some sort of ND is a vital part of my kit. For now I'm making do with the LCW. I'm going to be in NYC in a few weeks - so I'll be heading to B&H to find a better option.

[Martin Campbell]

Originally Posted by Chris Joy

I got the LCW vari-ND and I hate it. I went with the 82mm version with step down rings for all my lenses so its compatible with everything. No matter the lens, either prime (28, 35, 50, 85) or zoom (24-105, 70-200) I get that stupid X after only 3-4 stops max. So yes technically it will cut 8+ stops of light, but only 3-4 are usable. What a rip. The Genus version appears to be from the same manufacturer. I've debated trying the pricier Singh-Ray or just getting 2 or 3 Tiffen IR's that supposedly won't cut resolution or funk with color. I shoot out in bright light quite often so some sort of ND is a vital part of my kit. For now I'm making do with the LCW. I'm going to be in NYC in a few weeks - so I'll be heading to B&H to find a better option.

do you think you'll go with the Tiffen Variable ND then?

[Jeff Murray]

I use the Genus Fader ND - their marketing director confirmed to me they are sourced from a different manufacturer than the LCW.

I also use the 82mm with step down rings.

I use my Genus a lot and am very happy with the results (for video). Four stops is all you will get with any Fader ND. The cross you refer to is a physical phenomenon all Fader ND's will get irrespective of manufacturer - It's called Haidinger's brush or something and it occurs with the polarisation and the light waves.

For photography - I use HiTech ND's (resign) as I do feel the less glass you shoot through for photos - the better the result. For video it doesn't seem to matter as much - but I am only an amateur.

The Genus Fader ND kicks in on the video below at 2:30 to 3:10 and it saturates the colours in the golden hour really well. It's a glass filter and I was really happy with the price compared to the LCW and the Singh-Ray.

Scotland's Spring Beauty on Vimeo

PS: If you really want perfection you can drop $580 on a Schneider True-Match Variable Neutral Density Filter: https://www.schneideroptics.com/ecom...D=466&IID=8088

[Chris Joy]

I knew about the cross, its just frustrating that the Vari-ND's are being marketed as offering 8 stops and the max usable range is barely half that. For what I paid I could (or should) have just bought three of the Tiffen IR ND filters to cut 3 (0.9), 5 (1.5) and 7 (2.1) stops and called it good. I'm going to check them out firsthand before buying, but I'm pretty sure that's the route I'm going to go.

[Jonathan Shaw]

Hi Jeff,

I really love that opening shot, any chance you would share what settings you used?

Some great shots in there,

J

[Tom Hardwick]

A lovely little film Jeff - quite delightful! You must have the patience of a saint, young man.

[Jeff Murray]

Thanks All - was just putting in a plug for my very reasonable Genus ND Fader. I have to be honest - was really worried when I got it that I didn't invest in something 'high quality' but I have been pleased with it.

Sure it probably wouldn't stand the test of a big screen - but for weddings, events and the like - maybe corproate work it will be fine.

Chris, they were marketed as 8 - 10 stop when I bought mine. They now say 4 stop.

Johnathon, the opening is acheived in editing a simple star photo rotated under a soft edge crop with the crop reducing during the animation. The sunrise is a real timelapse. I had to do this to it as my soft edge ND fogged up so I didn't want to waste it.

To replicate this via a real timelapse in the city - a 30 - 60 second exposures will get you a star timelapse that turns into a sunrise. Aperture around F8 - 16, ISO 200 - 400. Depends on the available light - I only tried one once and used Adobe RAW to brighten the start photos and darken the sunrise - to balance out the exposure. It's guess work to be honest as you never know how the sunrise will be. Search for 'The Mountain' on vimeo for the best example I have seen or visit Timescapes Timelapse and click to the forum for all the help you will ever need.

Thanks, Tom - 11 days off work thanks to Easter rolled into the Royal Wedding rolled into May Day. What better way to spend it than getting up early and capturing some of this beautiful landscape?

PS: another thing I learned in this if your going to timelapse mist on water - 1 second intervals would be best - I used 7 seconds like I normally do for a sunrise and it was way to fast on playback.


Regards

Jeff

[John Richard]

Jeff - that is some beautiful work in a heaven on earth. Good for the soul. An example of what can be done with inexpensive equipment in the hands of someone who knows how to use it. We get too caught up in technical numbers when it is more about the skill.

[Nigel Barker]

In the South of France I am often shooting in very bright sunshine so I have been contemplating just getting the darkest Tiffen ND filter & changing the ISO to adjust exposure.