77mm Variable Neutral Density Filter (Page 3): It matters for me too. If you are a video shooter, it is common to have a relatively gentle ND filter to help get the shutter speed where...

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

leftj wrote:

I doesn't matter. It's a general question.

It matters for me too. If you are a video shooter, it is common to have a relatively gentle ND filter to help get the shutter speed where you want it for "filmic" effect. If you shoot creamy water motion stills, you may need a relatively strong ND filter. Variable filters have different ranges of effect and some might not me dark enough. If you are using a DSLR, it may be important to have a variable ND so you can see to frame and follow with a spin to shoot.

leftj Loc: Texas

bsprague wrote:

It matters for me too. If you are a video shooter, it is common to have a relatively gentle ND filter to help get the shutter speed where you want it for "filmic" effect. If you shoot creamy water motion stills, you may need a relatively strong ND filter. Variable filters have different ranges of effect and some might not me dark enough. If you are using a DSLR, it may be important to have a variable ND so you can see to frame and follow with a spin to shoot.

The question was a general question. All you need to do is just give the answer you just wrote and that's input on the question which I'm sure the poser of the question appreciates.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

leftj wrote:

The question was a general question. All you need to do is just give the answer you just wrote and that's input on the question which I'm sure the poser of the question appreciates.

OK

marty wild Loc: England

bsprague wrote:

It matters for me too. If you are a video shooter, it is common to have a relatively gentle ND filter to help get the shutter speed where you want it for "filmic" effect. If you shoot creamy water motion stills, you may need a relatively strong ND filter. Variable filters have different ranges of effect and some might not me dark enough. If you are using a DSLR, it may be important to have a variable ND so you can see to frame and follow with a spin to shoot.

I did have a variable ND. It now swims with the fishers. It was a filter from hell at £45.00 it was one of the worst buy I have made I have ND filters from 8 10 15 and 50 which work the rest I cover with ISO, F stops, time

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

leftj wrote:

So you could have answered the question with all this information in the first place. I'm sure the poser of the question will probably gain some insight from reading it.

Er... I did answer it in the first place - I only saw it this morning and responded. The reason i responded to your "response" is that you stated something that was just incorrect (a not uncommon issue on this forum) and I used that as a jumping point.

Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

catchlight.. Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway

Slowing the shutter speed on wide lens's...
When using a variable filter sparingly it can be useful for increasing the shutter speed on a wide aperture lens for a narrow DOF. A slight twist and you have instant fine adjustment to slow the shutter when it is just too bright. Anything under 3 stops and I have not had any X pattern issues. The X factor is not as defined or darkened enough to be a problem, but certainly it is at 6 or beyond it can be in my opinion. A useful way to manually and quickly adjust shutter speed beyond the limits of the camera's sensor. I will probably get bashed for this but I really like how this works with lenses like Canon's 50mm 1.2L for separating the subject and not stopping down the lens on a brightly lit day. Easy way to for ETTL-ETTR but again it is using it at for the lowest 3 stops and staying out of the extreme that brings on the X factor. Certainly strait filters are best for slow shutter speed effects.

repleo Loc: Boston

If you are going to use any sort of strong ND filter (variable or fixed) I suggest you get a phone app like LE Calculator to help calculate the exposure. It 's not infallible, but can save a lot of guesswork or mental mathematics.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Personally, I'm a fan of B&W filters. YMMV.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

MtnMan wrote:

I recommend against the rings. They add two threads to get stuck. Stuck filter threads are difficult to unstick because of thin thing to grab.

If you try it be sure to get filter wrenches first. They are cheap.

There can also be a vignetting issue with this approach.

I threw my rings away and bought desired filters.

The biggest drawback to stepping rings is that they need to be cared for and used properly.

kchamber4

I have found with Step up rings that when shooting wide open say 3.5 or 2.8 that I can get part of the shadow of the ring on my picture if I am not careful. I was using a 77 Star filter stepped down to a 58 or 63 (three rings) and in one corner of the picture there was a shadow. I found out that I didn't have the ring's screwed on straight and so they were just slightly out of alignment.

photodoc16

Aside from the cost of a variable ND filter, there is the problem of accuracy. I purchased a variable filter and as I was told at B+H, these filters are not as sharply accurate as the individual single density filters we are used to. This was a problem when it came time to adjust the shutter speed based on the strength of the filter in place. I didn't want to have to take two or three photos in order to get the desired effect. So now, I am back to the filters individually. Good luck with your choice.
Photodoc16

leftj Loc: Texas

f8lee wrote:

Er... I did answer it in the first place - I only saw it this morning and responded. The reason i responded to your "response" is that you stated something that was just incorrect (a not uncommon issue on this forum) and I used that as a jumping point.

Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

No hurt feelings but dying to know what I stated that was incorrect.

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

leftj wrote:

No hurt feelings but dying to know what I stated that was incorrect.

You were incorrect in stating "it doesn't matter" to bsprague's comment "To do what? And, on what?" - as in fact, it does indeed matter. Someone using a DSLR might have different thoughts about the hassle of having to remove/reinstall a dark ND filter every time they want to reframe, whereas for someone with an EVIL (electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens) camera it probably doesn't matter.

leftj Loc: Texas

f8lee wrote:

You were incorrect in stating "it doesn't matter" to bsprague's comment "To do what? And, on what?" - as in fact, it does indeed matter. Someone using a DSLR might have different thoughts about the hassle of having to remove/reinstall a dark ND filter every time they want to reframe, whereas for someone with an EVIL (electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens) camera it probably doesn't matter.

So - not incorrect. Just doesn't happen to align with your opinion. There's a different between incorrect and differing opinions. 2+2=5 is incorrect. Obama is a great president is an opinion however to be clear, that is not my opinion.

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

leftj wrote:

So - not incorrect. Just doesn't happen to align with your opinion. There's a different between incorrect and differing opinions. 2+2=5 is incorrect. Obama is a great president is an opinion however to be clear, that is not my opinion.

Ahem. I did not state any opinions - merely facts:
1) the cross effect does not occur on some cameras and does on others, and
2) using a vari-ND with a DSLR makes for more convenience

Neither of these are opinions (unless you believe it is easier to remove and then reattach the ND filter between shots when reframing on a DSLR). They are just facts.

Your opinion that it does not matter (as to what they are shooting) is thus factually incorrect, as it does matter.

Understand?