ND Filter Advice wanted

On my upcoming trip to Yellowstone I want to try a few waterfall pictures. I have already searched the forums and read most of the past threads about this.


I have been looking at the B+W filters and B+W will be the filters I buy so the advice I need relates to those filters.


I always buy the MRC coated lenses. The price is about double. For this particular application, the filter really will not be used occasionally. Not like a filter that stays on the lens.


The questions:

1. Do the MRC filters have better IQ? Other than cleaning and protection of the lens do I really need the MRC coating since at most the lens will only be used occasionally?
2. There are somefilters with the "Wide" designation, on the 24mm or if I go to a 21mm do I really need this? Is vignetting a problem?
3. With ND .3, .6 or .9 would this cover the typical situations. Going darker for a novice such as myself is probably not necessary?

I am also thinking getting either the TS-E24mm L or the Zeiss 21mm F2.8 Distagon but that's another thread completely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

Do the MRC filters have better IQ? Other than cleaning and protection of the lens do I really need the MRC coating since at most the lens will only be used occasionally?

---

B+W filters now come in 5 'flavors' with regard to coatings:

• uncoated
• single coated
• multi-coated (MC)
• multiresistant coated (MRC)
• nano coated

A single coating is primarily to reduce reflections and ghosting. MC does the same, but additionally allows higher light transmission. MRC is like MC, but with a dust- and water-repellant layer (similar to the fluorine coating on the front and rear the newest Canon lenses). Nano is their newest coating, and is like MRC but with slightly higher light transmission.


In the case of ND filters, the goal is to block light, so the increased light transmission that MRC offers is no benefot - the only reason to go with MRC for an ND filter is for easier cleaning (not a big deal for an occasionally-used filter, IMO). Also worth noting is that MRC is only available in 1- to 2-stop filters; the 1- to 3- stop filters are available with a single layer coating, and 6-stop and darker only come uncoated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

There are somefilters with the "Wide" designation, on the 24mm or if I go to a 21mm do I really need this? Is vignetting a problem?

---

Probably not necessary. The 'wide' designation means a larger filter than the threads (e.g. it's like a one-piece combination of a filter and a step up ring). The 24L already suffers from pretty bad vignetting wide open, but it doesn't get any worse with a UV filter (see Bryan's vignetting tests). Plus, you're unlikely to be shooting a landscape shot wide open, and vignetting improves when you stop down. So, a normal F-Pro mount should be fine.


Also, stay tuned...I recently did a whole set of test shots (>500 shots) to look at the effects of stacking multiple filters on vignetting. I don't have a 24L, but I used a 16-35mm, 24-105mm, 35L, 85L, and 17-55mm, each with various combinations of filters, to simulate stacking a standard ND onto an XS-Pro UV, a standard CPL onto a standard or XS-Pro UV filter, etc. The tests shots are done, I'm just in the process of doing the quantitative analysis - I'll post results next week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

With ND .3, .6 or .9 would this cover the typical situations. Going darker for a novice such as myself is probably not necessary?

---

Honestly, I'd skip the 0.3 and 0.6 (1- and 2-stop) filters all together. Get a 3-stop and probably a 6-stop (#106). In cases where you need one or two stops worth of slower shutter speed, you can use the 3 stop and bump the ISO from 100 to 200 or 400, with no real penalty on the bodies you're using.


Hope that helps...


--John

I can

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sean Setters

look very closely at the variable ND filters out there.

---

One big issue I have with the variable ND filters is that for wide angle use, they suffer from a 'maltese cross' effect. VariND's are basically a stacked pair of polarizers (one linear, one circular). In a situation where a CPL would give uneven polarization (e.g. 24mm on a FF body), a variable ND filter will result in a cross-shaped darkening through the image (see an example here).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

<p sizset="40" sizcache="7"]One big issue I have with the variable ND filters is that for wide angle use, they suffer from a 'maltese cross' effect. VariND's are basically a stacked pair of polarizers (one linear, one circular). In a situation where a CPL would give uneven polarization (e.g. 24mm on a FF body), a variable ND filter will result in a cross-shaped darkening through the image (see an example here).

---

That is true, indeed. However, I thought that issue was primarily caused when the ND was used very close to its maximum opacity. I could be wrong, though...

Forgot to add, but if you

Sean, as I understand it, the effect is there even at lower density settings at wide/ultrawide angles. The wider the angle and/or the darker the setting, the worse the effect. If you turn the variND beyond 'max' you can see the effect even at non-wide angles. On your 7D, you'd need something wider than 17mm (27mm FF-equivalent) to see the effect due to wide angle.

I wish they had a stop set for minimum and maximum points on the genus. I get lost a lot unless I start the filter the same way so the reference dots point up. All in all I

Hi Rick.....


That should be a great trip....I love Yellowstone.


I think John covered your questions, but I just wanted to add a little based on my brief waterfall experience:

• No filter: I've been able to get down to the 1/4 to 0.5 sec shutter speeds for smaller waterfalls, typically under tree cover and low overall light (early late in the day, heavy cloud cover)
• CPL (~1.7 stops).Thus far I've only been able to use a CPL to get in the necessary shutter speed range for smaller waterfalls that are under tree cover.
• B+W 106 (6 stops)---it was worked well for overcast days (ISO 100 and f/~5.6 to f/8)for exposed waterfals (so larger waterfalls, no tree cover). A couple of observations about this filter:
  
  • Itdefinitely "warms" the shot. AWB on my 7D does a great job in compensating for this, but if I use a preset such as cloudy or sunny, there is very obvious effects on WB. In post, I've compensated by adjusting color tempto 4400K to 4700K.
  • AE and AF still work with this filter.Sometimes the 7D does notindicate focus lock (beep or flash). It usually it does, but not always. But even the times it doesn't, looking at those photos they were still in focus and properly exposed. (EDIT---on a recent trip the AE still worked but underexposed by ~1 stop).
  
  
• I haven't yet had the opportunity to test the filters on a waterfall in direct sun (say lower falls from Artists Point.... [:D]), but I suspect I would be able to either drop my aperture down to f/11-f/22 range with the B+W106or stack a CPL on top of it.
• Remember filter wrenches. Having now used B+W screw in filters and step up rings on a couple of waterfall trips the filters jam in the step up ringstoo often. I've started not screwing them in all the way, which, of course, makes me worryabout the filter falling off . So a good set of filter wrenches or rubber bands are needed if you are going to stay with the B+W screw in series.
• In regard to image quality, I have found that the B+W106 (non-MRC)to beextremely good. I can look at 100% crops and I have not seen any effect in IQ. However, if you get this as well, I recently tried to photograph a GBH with the B+W Grad 102. 100% cropswith the grad 102were definitely negatively impacted. I hadn't noticed this in uncropped or slightly cropped images, but it is definitely an impact when looking at 100% crops using the B+W Grad 102.I am sure others here know, but my current assumption is that the B+W 106 ND is glass while the grad 102 is a resin.

It sounds like you want to stay with B+W, which is what I did, but, honestly, I may somedayswitch to the Cokin or Lee filter systems.Right now I can seeseveral benefits of those rectangular systems:

1. Decrease the potential for the threads jamming.
2. The B+W filters currently cause vignetting at wide angles. I believe this may be better with the retangular systems.
3. The ability to "feather" a graduated filter (moving the filter up and down during the exposure to blurr the graduated line).
4. I suspect that it is a little easier to alternate filters.

Maybe not a huge deal andI am happy with my B+W series.They work well and were less expensive than the rectangular system I was looking at.


Have a great trip.


Brant

Thanks Guys, I really appreciate the responses


Sean I considered, although didn't really research it allot, a filter like you described. My first thought is that just starting out trying this I wanted full control over how much I modify the light. My thoughts were keep it simple and straight forward for now. I will check in to the Genus more though.


John, as always thanks for the detailed response. I think I will be following your advice.


Brant, I just wrote a wrench down on my shopping list. I to think the rectangular systems is where I will eventually end up, but for now it seems the threaded filters will be the easiest.


Graduated filters were mentioned and there is something I was going to try, with all the advances in photoshop and the ease at which you can process a simple HDR, can you get the same effect as the filter by shooting several of the same landscape shots and combine them. For instance take one with the right exposure for sky, one for the ground then split the difference for one shot and combine all three. I have tried this on indoor pictures and as long as the subject is steady it seems to work. My only problem with HDR is that most people over do it in my opinion, it comes out artificial, possibly it can not be over done enough to still feel real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Forgot to add, but if you're interested in a variable ND, Rick, given your preference for B+W - they now offer one. It's not as convenient as the Genus or similar options, which are standard screw-in types. B+W's is actually a round CPL with a separate 4" square linear polarizer in a rotating holder mounted in front (a bit unwieldy, IMO, unless you're used to using rectangular filters, and it also precludes using a hood).

---

John, could you provide a link to this? I looked but couldn't find any info on it...

Apologies for the confusion, Sean. Technically it's not B+W, but rather their parent company, Schneider Optics. They market this set under a different line. Here's the link to the 77mm True Match Vari-ND kit. There's also a 95mm version.


FWIW, Schneider also produces the only Schott glass ND and graduated ND rectangular filters that I know of (vs. Lee, Singh-Ray, Cokin, which are all resin). They're targeted to the cine crowd, thus sold as the MPTV line (motion picture television), but they'll work fine for stills. B&amp;H carries many of them in 4x5.65".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

Graduated filters were mentioned and there is something I was going to try, with all the advances in photoshop and the ease at which you can process a simple HDR, can you get the same effect as the filter by shooting several of the same landscape shots and combine them.

---

A similar topic came up in a recent dPS article:Comparing Gradient Neutral Density Filters To Lightroom Gradient Tool. The author's conclusion was that, "...using tools in the computer after the fact is not a replacement for making sure data is captured correctly to begin with."


The problem with HDR for landscape shots is movement - wind in trees, waves, etc., all cause ghosting in HDR images.

This morning it was very bright so I took fitted my Genus ND Fader Filter onto my 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5. At 10mm, the cross-hatch pattern does indeed appear when you rotate the filter close to the maximum setting. However, it looked pretty clean at the 3/4 marker (except for a extra vignetting in two corners...it looks like I was just on the fringe of where the cross-hatching would start). If I had backed it off a bit more, I'm pretty sure the 2 corner vignetting would have disappeared. Anyway, at that opacity, I was able to shoot at f/16 for 1/8 second to get the following shot:



https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-7...0/IMG_2312.JPG

Thanks for the testing, Sean! That's certainly acceptable - and importantly for me, the Genus Vari-ND comes in an 82mm filter (which fits my EF 16-35mm f/2.8<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L II and TS-E 24mm f/3.5<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L II - else, the darkest screw-in ND available is merely 2 stops).


Any idea how many stops (approximately) that 3/4 setting on the vari-ND represents?


--John

When going that wide, does a step-ring help or hurt? Say you buy a really oversized Vari and use a ring, does that allow you to use more of the adjustment because the lens isn

Wow, lots of info here that I wasn't aware of! I wish I would have known some of this before I took my first waterfall photos on Friday using my Genus ND Fader filter! I think I would have done alittle testing with that and my B+W ND filter.


I already posted this in another thread but here seems appropriate also. This shot of a small waterfall was taken midday w/ partial shade and direct bright sun in some spots.


http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6144/...677ce5fe_b.jpg

I'm looking forward to seeing some photos when you get back from your trip andgetting some more education!

Denise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Thanks for the testing, Sean! That's certainly acceptable - and importantly for me, the Genus Vari-ND comes in an 82mm filter (which fits my EF 16-35mm f/2.8<span style="color:#ff0000;"]L II and TS-E 24mm f/3.5<span style="color:#ff0000;"]L II - else, the darkest screw-in ND available is merely 2 stops).


Any idea how many stops (approximately) that 3/4 setting on the vari-ND represents?


--John

---

To be honest, I'm unsure. It's not a linear progression when it comes to the opacity, so I know it's not 6 stops. I'll try to remember to do another test tomorrow to see how many stops it is at the 3/4s marker.


-Sean

Rick. I am at niagara falls. Got in last night so my first shots where this morning. To get good blur of the water I needed longer exposure than with a smaller falls (water has further to fall?). Anyways, I needed ~1-2 sec instead of the 1/4 to 1/2 sec with smaller falls. I ended up at 2 sec f/22 iso 100 with the 106. I may stack the cpl to get down around f/11, but you may also want to consider the B+w 110.


Andnowiambroke. The step up rings neither help nor hurt. The two factors you mention offset each other. At least with my set up of the 72-77 mm step up. Ultimately I get similar vignetting with a 77 mm cpl and step up ring as the 72 mm cpl. Perhaps I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Any idea how many stops (approximately) that 3/4 setting on the vari-ND represents?


--John

---

I did another quick test today. This time, I used shutter priority so that my shutter speed was constant. With the Genus set to the 3/4s mark, the camera set the aperture to f/5. With the ND filter off, the camera set the aperture to f/16. That's means you can achieve approximately a 3 1/3 stop reduction on a 16mm equivalent focal length without obvious cross hatching. With longer focal length, I imagine you could push more. Keep in mind, the rest of the 3.33 - 8 stop reduction comes in the last fourth of the markers. The change goes from very gradual to very sharp at the end. That said, the filter does a pretty good job of holding to a setting once you've got it fine tuned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ddt0725

<p sizset="39" sizcache="5"]I'm looking forward to seeing some photos when you get back from your trip andgetting some more education!

Denise
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

I usually learn mistakes after the fact. I will post some pics in a "how could I have done better" thread when I get back and find out what I should have done. At least with all the good advicein this threadI won't be able to blame it on my equipment.





Sean


Do you meter through the Genus? I see you checked the stop difference of the different marks. I am assuming since you hadn't checked it before thisyou meter as you adjust it with it on.


Also how about IQ loss using the Genus. From your post and picturesit appears you are not seeing a noticeable loss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

Sean


Do you meter through the Genus? I see you checked the stop difference of the different marks. I am assuming since you hadn't checked it before thisyou meter as you adjust it with it on.


Also how about IQ loss using the Genus. From your post and picturesit appears you are not seeing a noticeable loss.

---

To be honest, I don't usually meter anything. I shoot manual, guess at my settings, then chimp on the LCD screen and adjust from there. But, for the test above, I put the filter on and set the camera to shutter priority. I used evaluative metering and kept the framing identical. I let the camera adjust the exposure with the filter in place, then simply took the filter off and took the same shot. I used the difference in apertures to calculate the light loss.


As far as IQ goes, I've never noticed a significant degredation image quality, save for one instance where I forgot to remove my UV filter before attaching the Genus. I ended up getting a pretty bad halo effect around the bride's wedding dress. So, I wouldn't necessarily recommend stacking filters when using the Genus.

I wanted to follow up on my comments above. First, I did find that the AE was underexposing with the B+W 106 mounted. It would get close, but often ~1 stop underexposed. Below are a couple pictures of Horseshoe falls during the day with mostly direct sun (a few high clouds). You can see that I needed to stop down to get the ribbon effect to the water that I like even with the B+W ND 106 filter mounted. All pics, 7D, 15-85, B+W ND 106.


The exposures do not line up perfectly, but I think you get the idea:


50 mm, 1/8 sec, f/5.6, ISO 100


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/0574.Falls-eighth-sec-IMG_5F00_2107.JPG[/img]


53 mm, 1/4 sec, f/10, ISO 100


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/8507.falls-quarter-sec-IMG_5F00_2109.JPG[/img]


31 mm, 0.5 sec, f/18, ISO 100


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/7002.Falls-IMG_5F00_2117.JPG[/img]


35 mm, 1 sec, f/22, ISO 100


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/8357.Falls-IMG_5F00_2101.JPG[/img]

Have a great trip, I just came back and ended up with some nice shots.


On a side note, watch the steam and spray in the geyser basins. I came away with some etching on my B+W filters. I recommend keeping a lens cap on whenever possible.


-Patrick

Patrick


That's a good warning. Even though your gear is waterproof, the water has geyserite in it, a form of silica. It gets in your gear it could cause havoc I am sure. When I was there last year I kept a lens cloth dedicated to keeping my camera and lens body clean. Then a second cloth for the lens, and finally kept the lens cap on in between every picture.


I hope you post a few of your shots. I could use the inspiration.


Rick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

...importantly for me, the Genus Vari-ND comes in an 82mm filter (which fits my EF 16-35mm f/2.8<span style="color:#ff0000;"]L II and TS-E 24mm f/3.5<span style="color:#ff0000;"]L II - else, the darkest screw-in ND available is merely 2 stops).

---

Finally, B+W has delivered! Nearly a year ago, I had an email exchange with Schneider's customer service, inquiring about a 10-stop 82mm screw-in ND. Paul at Schneider informed me that they were investigating the feasibility of manufacturing such a filter for their Schneider line, and they've finally released one.


For anyone interested, it's Stock #68-043082, and in the US the only distributor offering them is 2filter.com (price is $226).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

For anyone interested, it's Stock #68-043082, and in the US the only distributor offering them is 2filter.com (price is $226).

---

...and, I've just ordered one. http://canonrumors.com/forum/Smileys/default/grin.gif

Wow.. some of those lenses on there are ungodly expensive. Made with Cinema in mind? Never seen an EOS mount lens for 4k before.


I suppose another option without even using a ND filter would be a longer exposure, say 15 sec, close to twilight.


Maybe you had posted them elsewhere, but did you get the shots you wanted? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

...and, I've just ordered one. http://canonrumors.com/forum/Smileys/default/grin.gif

---

Got a brief chance to try the new Schneider 82mm 10-stop ND out yesterday... The scene is a busy area of downtown Boston, the reflecting glass is side of the Hancock Tower, the tallest building in New England, dwarfing the Trinity Church across the street. Shots are with the 5DII + TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II, +10 shift. The first shot is a 1/6 s exposure, the second is a 30 s exposure during which several pedestrians walked through the scene, along with cars passing between the buildings. Thanks to the long exposure, they're not visible. Like my B+W 77mm 10-stop ND, this 10-stop filter does warm up the color temperature a bit - I didn't correct in post because in this case (dull gray, overcast day), I think it's beneficial.

Attachment 86 Attachment 85

Thanks for looking!

--John

EDIT: Wow, first time attaching vs. linking from Flickr. Pics uploaded here as attachments do take quite an IQ hit that goes along with the size reduction (~60% compression based on file size).

nice.... around how much did the schneider Vari ND cost? and from whom did you buy it?

This is a fixed 82mm 10-stop, and was $225 from 2filter.com (only place that has them, AFAIK

Schneider does have a Schott glass vari-ND, but it's not a round screw-in, but rather a pair of square polarizers in a Lee/Cokin-type holder (where the outer one rotates).