Variable ND filters

[djmay]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a 10 stop and 5 stop. I have not used the 5 stop yet because I needed to slow the shutter more in daylight. The 5 stop will be handy early or late in day, or when more than 10 stops are required.

 

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

[pico]

OI! Don't we have enough silken river streams?

 

Back on-topic, beware of variable ND filters. Some just mess up pictures very badly, depending upon degree.

.

[LorenzoLandini]

sure thing we have a lot of silky streams, the questions often is how many tourists / boats / cars / whatever you get in a cityscape/landscape... getting rid of them without using weapons of mass destruction is satisfying.. 

 

As an additional comment on filters and variable NDs in particular, because they are prone to flare I found that keeping the lens/filter in the shade with a hood or else is a must. If the filter has a good coating and it is kept in the shade then the probability of the filter messing up the picture is much lower. Again, this is one of those filters where quality is paramount. 

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

The CPL worked just fine, but for waterfalls my 3 stop just didn't get it, so I'm back thinking 10 stop or variable ND mainly for waterfalls and long exposures 

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

I ended up buying one of these puppies after many recommendations from my buddies over at Talk Photography

 

Breakthrough Photography BRX4ND1082
82mm X4 Solid Neutral Density 3.0 Filter (10 Stop)
 

[LorenzoLandini]

I ended up buying one of these puppies after many recommendations from my buddies over at Talk Photography

 

Breakthrough Photography BRX4ND1082

82mm X4 Solid Neutral Density 3.0 Filter (10 Stop)

 

 

I looked at those ND filters and I ended up buying other Formatt Hitech Firecrest ND filters because I found mixed reviews of the Breakthrough filters. Please let us know what you think of them and how they performed. thanks

[Vieri]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Filters are extremely useful for landscape photography, and as others said everyone has a purpose. To me, a good kit includes:

 

- Polariser;

- Grad ND, Soft, 0.6, 0.9 and 1.2 or 1.5

- Solid ND, 6, 10 and 13 stops for 135, just 6 and 10 stops for MF.

 

Definitely get a square system, 100mm if that's enough to cover all your lenses (you can use a 100 mm filter with the Leica S 24mm as well). Brands, I tested Lee, Singh-Ray and Fornatt-Hitech side to side and found that the latter are the most colour neutral by far. You can read my article HERE if you are interested in the comparison.

 

Best,

 

Vieri

[LorenzoLandini]

Vieri, 

 

I agree with your comments on the Formatt-Hitech with respect to ND filters, less so with respect to polarizer and GND filters where I found Heliopan and Schnider (4mm glass), respectively, to provide a very good and neutral color rendition. 

 

How often do you actually use the 0.6 GND? I use the 0.9 and 1.2 most of the times, I think the 0.6 doesn't have such a distinctive strength to make a difference, or at least a difference that the DR of the sensor couldn't cope with with some help in post processing. 

 

Another question: why are you limiting the NDs for DMF to 10 stops? I had your very same thought at the beginning but then I ended up using the 13-stop more than expected. The 13-stop NDs allowed me to keep the optimal f-stop and 100 ISO in full day light while achieving the shutter speed I was looking for (..limited to, and often aiming at, the 125s of the S). I have a 16-stop ND that I found useful too, but it is certainly less used than the 13-stop ND. Noise seems to be under control with the S at those long exposure times, at least to my eyes. I am curious to understand your rational behind your choice. 

 

Cheers, 

Lorenzo 

[Vieri]

Vieri, 

 

I agree with your comments on the Formatt-Hitech with respect to ND filters, less so with respect to polarizer and GND filters where I found Heliopan and Schnider (4mm glass), respectively, to provide a very good and neutral color rendition. 

 

How often do you actually use the 0.6 GND? I use the 0.9 and 1.2 most of the times, I think the 0.6 doesn't have such a distinctive strength to make a difference, or at least a difference that the DR of the sensor couldn't cope with with some help in post processing. 

 

Another question: why are you limiting the NDs for DMF to 10 stops? I had your very same thought at the beginning but then I ended up using the 13-stop more than expected. The 13-stop NDs allowed me to keep the optimal f-stop and 100 ISO in full day light while achieving the shutter speed I was looking for (..limited to, and often aiming at, the 125s of the S). I have a 16-stop ND that I found useful too, but it is certainly less used than the 13-stop ND. Noise seems to be under control with the S at those long exposure times, at least to my eyes. I am curious to understand your rational behind your choice. 

 

Cheers, 

Lorenzo 

 

Lorenzo,

 

thank you for your reply. Coming to your points:

 

- FH Firecrest Grads and Polariser. As you can see from my tests, FH Firecrest grads are very neutral, certainly enough to be happy with them; I haven't tested Heliopan and Schneider, but the fact that FH Firecrest are 2mm is a big plus for me. How do you like 4mm filters? To me, since NDs are 2mm, that would mean having to have different slots in the adapter, which I think is less practical in the field than having all 2mm. Curious to see what your experience is on this one.

 

- 0.6 Grad: since I started using Firecrest, which is only Soft Edge, I don't use it much anymore alone. I used to use 0.6 Hard Edge quite a bit when using Lee. What I do use 0.6 still is to combine it with the 0.9 GND and lowering them differently to grad filtration even more.

 

- About DMF, my answer was a reflex of my Pentax 645z times; in the field, I was almost at f/16 or f/22, and didn't need more than 10 stops. Now that I am using the Leica S, with its fastest lenses, I think that may change. I haven't gone on a serious trip with the 007 yet nor have I  worked with it long enough out of my home, but as soon as I will have more experience in the field with that camera I'll get back to you on this one. I can see 13 stop to be very useful with the S, and I will certainly not leave it at home

 

All the best,

 

Vieri

[Rolo]

(you can use a 100 mm filter with the Leica S 24mm as well). Brands, I tested Lee

Best, Vieri

Vieri,

Which 100mm filter holder can you use on the S24mm with its 95mm filter thread ??

 

I contacted Lee directly, as I'd much prefer to use my existing 100mm filters, which fit all my S and Hasselblad lenses, but they would/could not offer a Wide-angle mount and informed that a 95mm mount with the Standard holder would create significant vignetting. Their suggested solution was to buy into the 150mm range. As a consequence, I only have Heliopan UV and 10 Stop (£150) filters.

 

Without reading your post above, I would have today pressed the PayPal button on a 6 stop 95mm ND Heliopan/B+W. I like to introduce movement, or OOF effects but composing is not easy with the 10 Stop filter attached, but a 6 Stop will largely overcome my issues. I do not unscrew the filter between shots an don't want to, especially if shooting for a stitched combination. Another massive benefit would being able to use my Lee Grads and Polariser in combination, if I so choose.

 

Please advise asap. :-)

 

Gary

[Vieri]

Vieri,

Which 100mm filter holder can you use on the S24mm with its 95mm filter thread ??

 

I contacted Lee directly, as I'd much prefer to use my existing 100mm filters, which fit all my S and Hasselblad lenses, but they would/could not offer a Wide-angle mount and informed that a 95mm mount with the Standard holder would create significant vignetting. Their suggested solution was to buy into the 150mm range. As a consequence, I only have Heliopan UV and 10 Stop (£150) filters.

 

Without reading your post above, I would have today pressed the PayPal button on a 6 stop 95mm ND Heliopan/B+W. I like to introduce movement, or OOF effects but composing is not easy with the 10 Stop filter attached, but a 6 Stop will largely overcome my issues. I do not unscrew the filter between shots an don't want to, especially if shooting for a stitched combination. Another massive benefit would being able to use my Lee Grads and Polariser in combination, if I so choose.

 

Please advise asap. :-)

 

Gary

 

Hello Gary,

 

you can use the Lee Push-On Filter Holder. It is a bit too large for the lens, but adding some felt stripes into it would make for a perfect fit. It is here:

 

http://www.leefilters.com/index.php/camera-directory/camera-dir-list/category/push-on-filter-holder

 

I tried it, and it works perfectly without causing any vignetting; in horizontal orientation, turning it will cause vignetting at some point, but you'll have enough rotation for most situations. In vertical orientation, you are fine. Hope this helps, best

 

Vieri

[Rolo]

Hello Gary,

 

you can use the Lee Push-On Filter Holder. It is a bit too large for the lens, but adding some felt stripes into it would make for a perfect fit. It is here:

 

http://www.leefilters.com/index.php/camera-directory/camera-dir-list/category/push-on-filter-holder

 

I tried it, and it works perfectly without causing any vignetting; in horizontal orientation, turning it will cause vignetting at some point, but you'll have enough rotation for most situations. In vertical orientation, you are fine. Hope this helps, best

 

Vieri

 

 

Vieri,

Excellent news.  Thank you very much.  I've looked at the Lee site and I'll have one shortly.

 

However, I already have 3 Lee filter holders and am wondering whether I can cannibalise one of these ?  I presume you have the standard holder as well so, could you compare and advise if removing the two tabs on the standard holder will convert it to a push on, or are there other differences ?  Perhaps a little extra removal of plastic is necessary as the inner diameter is 95mm and the countersunk inset is 100mm.  100mm seems too large for the diameter, but would be OK with a layer of protective electrician's tape on the lens outer ring.  I'm thinking a Dremel is all I need to convert one.  Brilliant if I can.

 

Does the brass holder remain, or is this a modified one.

 

Many thanks.

 

Gary

[LorenzoLandini]

Lorenzo,

 

thank you for your reply. Coming to your points:

 

- FH Firecrest Grads and Polariser. As you can see from my tests, FH Firecrest grads are very neutral, certainly enough to be happy with them; I haven't tested Heliopan and Schneider, but the fact that FH Firecrest are 2mm is a big plus for me. How do you like 4mm filters? To me, since NDs are 2mm, that would mean having to have different slots in the adapter, which I think is less practical in the field than having all 2mm. Curious to see what your experience is on this one.

 

- 0.6 Grad: since I started using Firecrest, which is only Soft Edge, I don't use it much anymore alone. I used to use 0.6 Hard Edge quite a bit when using Lee. What I do use 0.6 still is to combine it with the 0.9 GND and lowering them differently to grad filtration even more.

 

- About DMF, my answer was a reflex of my Pentax 645z times; in the field, I was almost at f/16 or f/22, and didn't need more than 10 stops. Now that I am using the Leica S, with its fastest lenses, I think that may change. I haven't gone on a serious trip with the 007 yet nor have I  worked with it long enough out of my home, but as soon as I will have more experience in the field with that camera I'll get back to you on this one. I can see 13 stop to be very useful with the S, and I will certainly not leave it at home

 

All the best,

 

Vieri

 

Vieri - thanks for the info. 

 

I agree on the Firecrest, which are indeed the ND 13 and 16-stop filters I am using with the S. They are less prone than other to magenta and blue hues. In full day light I am able to keep the exposure within the f5.6-11.0 / ISO100 / max 125s boundaries most of the times. I also have a variable ND up to 6 stops that could help me out when the above doesn't work. 

 

I use a LEE filter adapter with the slot closest to the lens for the 2mm glass Firecrest ND filters and a second 4mm slot for the Schneider 4-mm glass GND with the Heliopan CPL in the front as needed. With this set up I had to give up on using more than one GND, and I can live with it. I am of the view that less is better when it comes to filters in front of optically superb lenses, no matter how good the filters are.

 

I get some vignetting with the polarizer when used with the 30mm, not a deal breaker though. 

 

I found the Schneider GND to be very neutral in color as it filters out well the IR as well as visible light (probably similar to the Firecrest). They are made of schott glass. The final rendition is good with no apparent lost of details or sharpness. The 4mm thickness helps to make it sturdy and being made of glass they are not prone to scratches. They possibly perform very similarly to the Hitech firecrest filters that I couldn't get and test since they were out of stock for months. David Farkas of Leica Miami had good experience with the Schneider filters and he sells them, you may want to reach out to him to seek his feedback if you're considering giving them a shot. 

 

Cheers,

Lorenzo 

[Vieri]

Vieri,

Excellent news.  Thank you very much.  I've looked at the Lee site and I'll have one shortly.

 

However, I already have 3 Lee filter holders and am wondering whether I can cannibalise one of these ?  I presume you have the standard holder as well so, could you compare and advise if removing the two tabs on the standard holder will convert it to a push on, or are there other differences ?  Perhaps a little extra removal of plastic is necessary as the inner diameter is 95mm and the countersunk inset is 100mm.  100mm seems too large for the diameter, but would be OK with a layer of protective electrician's tape on the lens outer ring.  I'm thinking a Dremel is all I need to convert one.  Brilliant if I can.

 

Does the brass holder remain, or is this a modified one.

 

Many thanks.

 

Gary

 

 

Gary,

 

sure thing, I am glad to be of help

 

About the regular Lee adapter, I think you might be able to cannibalise one in terms of inner diameter; however, the push-on adapter has a ring inside the adapter, which you tighten turning a screw that replaces the brass springed tab, and which is very helpful to keep it steady on your lens. You just need to add some thickness on both sides of said inner ring, and I found that felt is good for that; thick enough, not going to scratch your lens, and adds some buffering between the metal ring of the push-on adapter and the lens barrel itself. I am not sure this makes much sense, I will be away until monday but if you haven't got your push-on by then I will gladly do some photograph of it on the 24m and post it for you on tuesday. Let me know.

 

All the best,

 

Vieri

[Vieri]

Vieri - thanks for the info. 

 

I agree on the Firecrest, which are indeed the ND 13 and 16-stop filters I am using with the S. They are less prone than other to magenta and blue hues. In full day light I am able to keep the exposure within the f5.6-11.0 / ISO100 / max 125s boundaries most of the times. I also have a variable ND up to 6 stops that could help me out when the above doesn't work. 

 

I use a LEE filter adapter with the slot closest to the lens for the 2mm glass Firecrest ND filters and a second 4mm slot for the Schneider 4-mm glass GND with the Heliopan CPL in the front as needed. With this set up I had to give up on using more than one GND, and I can live with it. I am of the view that less is better when it comes to filters in front of optically superb lenses, no matter how good the filters are.

 

I get some vignetting with the polarizer when used with the 30mm, not a deal breaker though. 

 

I found the Schneider GND to be very neutral in color as it filters out well the IR as well as visible light (probably similar to the Firecrest). They are made of schott glass. The final rendition is good with no apparent lost of details or sharpness. The 4mm thickness helps to make it sturdy and being made of glass they are not prone to scratches. They possibly perform very similarly to the Hitech firecrest filters that I couldn't get and test since they were out of stock for months. David Farkas of Leica Miami had good experience with the Schneider filters and he sells them, you may want to reach out to him to seek his feedback if you're considering giving them a shot. 

 

Cheers,

Lorenzo 

 

Lorenzo,

 

thank you very much for your message, got it about the 4mm filters. I think from what you told me that the Schneider are basically a "thicker Firecrest", both use Schott glass, both are not prone to scratch (but they will break, I guess the 4mm is a bit sturdier). I was lucky enough to get all the Firecrest I needed either from FH or from Amazon UK (even if I live in Italy!). The only difference is that I use three slots on my adapter, sometimes I find it useful to drop 2 GND as mentioned before. In the end, brands / filter thickness aside it seems that we are using pretty much the same setup.

 

Cheers,

 

Vieri

[djmay]

I have carried graduated ND filters (2 and 3 stop) for years but used them maybe twice. Working primarily with medium and large format BW film, it was not necessary. The dynamic range in the film + processing was more than adequate. Having recently started using the S, I also have not noticed the need. A 2-3 stop differential is handled by the camera's dynamic range, provided the bright areas are not overexposed. Before the S, also with the M9, dynamic range was sufficient. When extreme lighting conditions present, I have used HDR with both M9 and S.

 

I am interested in the situations of the photographers that use graduated ND filters, why they were necessary. Did you compare a filtered shot with a non-filtered shot? Sometimes, when I do an HDR set, I choose an individual exposure for the final image and not the HDR. That is how good the dynamic range is.

 

Jesse

[Vieri]

Vieri,

Excellent news.  Thank you very much.  I've looked at the Lee site and I'll have one shortly.

 

However, I already have 3 Lee filter holders and am wondering whether I can cannibalise one of these ?  I presume you have the standard holder as well so, could you compare and advise if removing the two tabs on the standard holder will convert it to a push on, or are there other differences ?  Perhaps a little extra removal of plastic is necessary as the inner diameter is 95mm and the countersunk inset is 100mm.  100mm seems too large for the diameter, but would be OK with a layer of protective electrician's tape on the lens outer ring.  I'm thinking a Dremel is all I need to convert one.  Brilliant if I can.

 

Does the brass holder remain, or is this a modified one.

 

Many thanks.

 

Gary

 

 

Gary,

 

as promised, I just posted an article on using square filters on the Leica Super-Elmar-S 24mm here:

 

https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/08/100mm-square-filters-leica-super-elmar-s-24mm.html

 

Hope it helps. Best,

 

Vieri

[Vieri]

I have carried graduated ND filters (2 and 3 stop) for years but used them maybe twice. Working primarily with medium and large format BW film, it was not necessary. The dynamic range in the film + processing was more than adequate. Having recently started using the S, I also have not noticed the need. A 2-3 stop differential is handled by the camera's dynamic range, provided the bright areas are not overexposed. Before the S, also with the M9, dynamic range was sufficient. When extreme lighting conditions present, I have used HDR with both M9 and S.

 

I am interested in the situations of the photographers that use graduated ND filters, why they were necessary. Did you compare a filtered shot with a non-filtered shot? Sometimes, when I do an HDR set, I choose an individual exposure for the final image and not the HDR. That is how good the dynamic range is.

 

Jesse

 

Jesse,

 

I almost always use Grad NDs with digital for my work. Here are my reasons:

1. Philosophically speaking I prefer to get my exposure right in camera, and practically speaking I'd prefer to get my image right in camera and do less PP work;

2. I don't want to raise the shadows in PP if I can avoid it, even if the camera have enough dynamic range doing that will introduce noise and degrade image quality even if just a little;

3. There are situations (i.e. sunsets or sunrises shooting towards the sun, and more) where the camera's DR is not enough: you'd have to do HDR, which I don't like to do because of point 1 above and because with long exposures, which I often do, and with moving stuff etc is not always feasible or if it is it's a lot of work that can be avoided just by dropping a filter.

 

These are my main reasons, of course your needs and your solutions to these needs might be different. Best,

 

Vieri

[Rolo]

Gary,

 

as promised, I just posted an article on using square filters on the Leica Super-Elmar-S 24mm here:

 

https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/08/100mm-square-filters-leica-super-elmar-s-24mm.html

 

Hope it helps. Best,

 

Vieri

My new push-on holder arrived on Friday. Good decision to buy one, methinks.

 

Thanks for the guidance.

 

Gary

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[LorenzoLandini]

I have carried graduated ND filters (2 and 3 stop) for years but used them maybe twice. Working primarily with medium and large format BW film, it was not necessary. The dynamic range in the film + processing was more than adequate. Having recently started using the S, I also have not noticed the need. A 2-3 stop differential is handled by the camera's dynamic range, provided the bright areas are not overexposed. Before the S, also with the M9, dynamic range was sufficient. When extreme lighting conditions present, I have used HDR with both M9 and S.

 

I am interested in the situations of the photographers that use graduated ND filters, why they were necessary. Did you compare a filtered shot with a non-filtered shot? Sometimes, when I do an HDR set, I choose an individual exposure for the final image and not the HDR. That is how good the dynamic range is.

 

Jesse

 

 

Negatives offer a good dynamic range and it's almost impossible to blow out the highlights, which makes GND less needed. I shoot 4x5 too, both negative B&W and color E6 and with the E6 I use GNDs because the dynamic range is limited and because E6 files are not always easy to deal with in post processing and having the exposure right and close to perfection in camera makes a difference. 

 

With respect to the S, I agree with Vieri. I too strongly prefer to have the file as much as possible good out of the camera than to make it work in post-processing. The digital file is less stressed if the light is balanced out without having to recover a lot of shadows or highlights at risk of over processing the image. The camera also records more information with a GND that you can play with afterwards.  

 

I generally have a shot without filters for any of the pictures where I end up using filters. That's because I always start without filters to find the right exposure, composition etc.. I then check with the spot meter the difference in brightness between sky and ground and if it is more than 2 stops I then use a GND to see whether I can get the light more balanced. Afterwards in post processing you can compare the two files and determined what's best. Generally in those situations the one with the GNDs lead to a better final image and print. 

 

I personally don't like HDR and I would use it only in extreme light situations. If you're in the field and you're working hard because of that particular light situation you're facing, then it's good to have a plan B and a plan C and so it's worth having a HDR image too. But generally, even in those situations the HDR file is not the one that I end up liking the most. 

 

My two cents.