B+W Neutral Density

[alex]

Hi everyone,


Haven't posted in a while now, I guess I've fallen into a little bit of a lurking phase. []


Got some Christmas money, planning on getting the B+W circular polarizer (MRC) for my 17-55 IS.


Would also like to get a ND filter for daylight longer exposures for waterfalls, streams, etc. I've had a hard time deciding if I should get a 0.6 or a 0.9 factor filter.


It seems that B+W doesn't make a 0.9 with the MRC. If that truly is the case, I'll definitely get the 0.6 over the 0.9 I think. Does anyone know if there is a B+W 0.9 ND with the MRC?


However, then I started thinking about some really cool shots I've seen where people have gotten the entire sky to be misted from movement of the clouds, or the ocean completely misted....like a 30+ second exposure during the day. I'm assuming they use a 3.0 factor ND for this?


Is there one ND filter that I could get for all these applications? Would just getting the 3.0 be a hassle since it's SO DARK?


I guess I'm wondering if I would have to get both a 0.6/0.9 and the 1.8/3.0 to achieve all the things I'm wanting to do.


Thanks!

[Jorundr-Jorgensen]

Hey Alex


A bit over a year ago I bought 2 B+W ND filters for long expo shots, the 106 (0,6?) and the 110. (1.?) Great filters, lots of fun with those, but I don't know about MRC, and to be honest, I didn't really pay attention to it so I can't advice you on that.


After a while of using I think I can tell you that the 0,6 will be enough to do streams and waterfalls since this is not 30+sec were talking about but for that creamy/misty sea effect I think you need the 0,9 or higher? Sometimes when I really want to get upto 4 minutes or longer I put them over each other to kinda double their effect.


Hope this was of some help and good luck!
Jorund.

[Mark Elberson]

Is there one ND filter that I could get for all these applications?
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Sure is!

Singh-Ray 77mm Vari-ND (Neutral Density) Filter


The Singh-Ray 77mm Vari-ND (Neutral Density) Filter gives you the control to produce stunning images without the need of carrying around a full set of ND filters. Thissingle filter gives you an amazing choice of 8 dial-in stops of neutral density by merely mounting it on your lens and "twisting" the ring to whatever degree of filtration you need or require.

[alex]

Holy cow, that's expensive! But I suppose it's cheaper than buying 4 different ND filters.


Too much for me, though. If I get that, I can't get the polarizer.


Does anyone have an opinion about which two ND filters I should get, given the desires I listed above?

[neuroanatomist]

There is no B+W 103 MRC ND filter. The 103 does have a single layer coating, and optical performance is nearly as good as the multi-layer coaring (but lacks the scratch resistance). Higher density filters (106 and up) are uncoated.


I'd recommend getting the B+W 103 (0.9, 3 stops) and a Slim-mount CPL. Keep in mind that the CPL gives about 2 stops of light reduction (regardless of the orientation of the polarizer), so if you rotate it so there's no polarization, you effectively have a 2 stop ND filter (albeit an expensive one). To me, that makes theB+W 103 (0.6, 2 stops) a bit superfluous. Likewise, if needed you can stack the CPL on top of the ND for 5 stops total.


If you truly want 30+ second exposures in daylight, you'll want at least the B+W 110 (3.0, 10 stops) if not the 113 (4.0, 13 stops). Both of those also have a slight 'warming' effect (higher transmission in the red wavelengths).

[alex]

thanks neuro, i appreciate the information. i hadn't thought about the 0.6 being basically equivalent to the CP.


so i'll lean toward getting the CP, the ND 0.9, and the ND 3.0.

[neuroanatomist]

i hadn't thought about the 0.6 being basically equivalent to the CP.

Yep. In fact, the the Singh-Ray Vari-ND filter is essentially two stacked polarizers (one circular and one linear) - when rotated so the polarizing grids are in the same orientation, it's a 2 stop ND, and as you rotate one of them the apparent density of the filter increases (and actually keeps on increasing - if rotated so the grids are 90&deg; to one another, no light passes, which is why Singh-Ray states that you can get &gt;8 stops of reduction, but they don't recommend it because it results in interference artifacts).