Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted June 26, 2016 Share #1 Posted June 26, 2016 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Lastnight I was looking at buying the Singh Ray variable ND filter from B&H for my Switzerland trip (Landscape Photography) but when I saw that the shipping at tax was nearly 200 bucks to the UK I decided that 90% of what they can do can be done in post processing........Am I thinks straight?? Neil Edited June 26, 2016 by Neil D Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 26, 2016 Posted June 26, 2016 Hi Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS, Take a look here Variable ND filters. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
John McMaster Posted June 26, 2016 Share #2 Posted June 26, 2016 I doubt it, how can you do the same as an ND (long exposure or wider aperture ) in PP??? john Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted June 26, 2016 Share #3 Posted June 26, 2016 I doubt it, how can you do the same as an ND (long exposure or wider aperture ) in PP??? john I forgot to mention the words for Landscape photography.......the 10% was for the long exposures Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted June 26, 2016 Share #4 Posted June 26, 2016 Unless you're planning on some long exposure moving water shots, why would you need a variable ND filter for landscape shots? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted June 26, 2016 Share #5 Posted June 26, 2016 Split ND filters (top/bottom split) are common for landscape, e.g., to darken sky. While this can sometimes be done in post, it avoids blowing highlights at capture, or having to boost shadows too much in post (noise). Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted June 26, 2016 Share #6 Posted June 26, 2016 Unless you're planning on some long exposure moving water shots, why would you need a variable ND filter for landscape shots? That's what I am thinking Andy. I have a ND 3 that I use for waterfalls and in really bright sunlight that we can get here in Asia. Normally when I go out shooting landscape I use a Lee soft ND 06 or 09 to tame the sky Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted June 26, 2016 Share #7 Posted June 26, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Split ND filters (top/bottom split) are common for landscape, e.g., to darken sky. While this can sometimes be done in post, it avoids blowing highlights at capture, or having to boost shadows too much in post (noise). Jeff Jeff I guess we were typing at the same time.......hahaha Yesterday I was out shooting film with my mate in KL and he was using a Sing Ray variable ND filter. Rather than hurt his feelings I just kept my mouth shut and thought I would ask the question her instead......I will stick with what I have got and use the 600 bucks for something else Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted June 26, 2016 Share #8 Posted June 26, 2016 I think a polarizing filter is more worthwhile....no easy way to really duplicate in post. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted June 27, 2016 Share #9 Posted June 27, 2016 I think a polarizing filter is more worthwhile....no easy way to really duplicate in post. Jeff i just ordered a CPL. Hopefully it won't take to long to arrive in the Uk Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xiaubauu2009 Posted June 27, 2016 Share #10 Posted June 27, 2016 Just get a 10Stop ND to shoot those water flowing shots... and shoot HDR to replace the GND.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertknappmd Posted June 27, 2016 Share #11 Posted June 27, 2016 consider a B+W 3.0 ND for 10 stops.... great water fall and river pictures! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted June 27, 2016 Share #12 Posted June 27, 2016 You really don't need 10 stops. I use a ND 8 which is 3 stops and plenty to cream up waterfalls by slowing the shutter to 1 second Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EoinC Posted June 27, 2016 Share #13 Posted June 27, 2016 You really don't need 10 stops. I use a ND 8 which is 3 stops and plenty to cream up waterfalls by slowing the shutter to 1 second Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk That depends on the light, aperture, and lowest ISO available, Neil. 10 stop filters have their uses. "Need" is subjective. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xiaubauu2009 Posted June 28, 2016 Share #14 Posted June 28, 2016 Couldn't agree more! Need is subjective... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertknappmd Posted July 11, 2016 Share #15 Posted July 11, 2016 The variable ND filters have one flaw: they are a combination of filters and can cause unwanted artifacts in an otherwise clear sky. They probably cause the same artifacts elsewhere but you just don't see them. I use the 3.0 for most of my work in sunny climes but have also used a 1.0 in conjunction with a polarizer. In darker areas, a simple polarizer suffices as illustrated by the accompanying photo shot in the Olympic National Park in Washington state last June.... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Albert Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Albert ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/262032-variable-nd-filters/?do=findComment&comment=3077152'>More sharing options...
LorenzoLandini Posted July 11, 2016 Share #16 Posted July 11, 2016 NDs, variable NDs, GNDs and CPL filters have all a purpose in landscape photography and each of them should be used for the purpose it was meant for. One doesn't replace another one. Often they are a nice to have and not necessarily a must have, though if you are someone that like and appreciate a photograph taken as much as possible right out of the camera then filters are very useful to minimize post processing adjustments later on that often don't produce the same results of pictures well made in the first place. It all depends on your vision and what you are trying to achieve, but what can be done in post processing is limited. I use a 6-stop variable ND to adjust the shutter speed and smooth out water while keeping ISO and f-stop as close as possible to the optimal. As also mentioned, they are prone to flare and artifacts because of the combination of the two filters together and the quality of the coating of such filters is very important to minimize the flare. However, for long exposure in the middle of the day (or even early morning) a 6-stop ND filter most likely would not make it and in those situations I use a 10 or a 16-stop ND filter. By contrast, in my opinion the most useful filters by far are the graduated ND filters to balance out the light, keep the highlights under control, pull out clouds while maintaining the right exposure in the shades. Often there are 2 to 4 stops difference between a sky and the water or the sky and the landscape and I find a 3 and 4-stop GND filters to be very useful. A polarizer would have a different purpose by both darkening skies, increasing contrast and more importantly removing glare from water. Often I use a combination of filters with my Leica S depending on the light situation and what I am trying to achieve with the photographs. The problem with the filters is their cost given that any filter would most likely degrade to certain degree the image quality, especially when using top notch glass like with the S, and therefore filters should be used only when needed and only the very best filters should be used to minimize such degradation. To this end a set of good filters may end up having a eyes watering cost... My two cents... Lorenzo 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertknappmd Posted July 13, 2016 Share #17 Posted July 13, 2016 The problem with the filters is their cost given that any filter would most likely degrade to certain degree the image quality, especially when using top notch glass like with the S, and therefore filters should be used only when needed and only the very best filters should be used to minimize such degradation. To this end a set of good filters may end up having a eyes watering cost. True.. Better to have a few high quality filters and use only when really needed! Albert Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted July 13, 2016 Share #18 Posted July 13, 2016 The problem with the filters is their cost given that any filter would most likely degrade to certain degree the image quality, especially when using top notch glass like with the S, and therefore filters should be used only when needed and only the very best filters should be used to minimize such degradation. To this end a set of good filters may end up having a eyes watering cost. True.. Better to have a few high quality filters and use only when really needed! Albert im using the Singh Ray and Lee filters Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted July 13, 2016 Share #19 Posted July 13, 2016 The problem with the filters is their cost given that any filter would most likely degrade to certain degree the image quality, especially when using top notch glass like with the S, and therefore filters should be used only when needed and only the very best filters should be used to minimize such degradation. To this end a set of good filters may end up having a eyes watering cost. True.. Better to have a few high quality filters and use only when really needed! Albert im using the Singh Ray and Lee filters Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LorenzoLandini Posted July 13, 2016 Share #20 Posted July 13, 2016 I looked at both Singh Ray and Lee Filters and for a number of reasons I went with other brands. Because I haven't tested them side by side I can't opine on them. I am sure you did well. I use two Heliopan polarizer filters that costed me a kidney (thanks God I have two), two Schneider 4-mm glass GND and two Formatt-Hitech firecrest ND filters for long exposure. Adding a few adapter rings and I ended up at almost $2,000... to me it is eye watering... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.