St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

I was ready to buy an assortment of filters ranging from UV, to Polarized and several Gradients then I came across a website that made me question - Circle or Square?

What do you use or recommend? Is it better to buy circle filters that screw on to your lens or square filters that fit in an adapter?

A screw on circle UV Filter makes sense for most days and gives me a sense of protection. For the rest I am lost.

Circle filters seem secure and easy to use, but you need to buy a new one for each size lens while square filters seem more cumbersome, but you buy one and you are done. Mostly I am stuck here - cost verse cost.

Also, how do you adjust a circle GD filter for a sunset? With the square you move it up and down... With a circle do you move the shot?

And while we are at it, if I go with the square filters for CP and GD then how do I adjust them independently or do I not use them together?

I think I understand filters, it’s the using them that I don't know yet. All opinions welcome!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Something I learned here too late: Buy a circular filter for your largest lens and then use step-up adaptors to use it on other lenses.

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Thank JerryC41! I hadn't thought of that...but now that I'm thinking... I'm new - how do I plan for future lenes? laf

effrant Loc: New Hampshire

Glenn K

That's a darn fine idea. Thanks.

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

Square filter means you still have to buy the filter holder and adapter rings for each lens size, stick with one large round filter and buy the step down rings for your other lens sizes.

BOB Loc: Texas

By you bank account...lol
as expensive as they are.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

You get a 77mm one as that is generally the largest filter size...then your adapter rings which are a few buck each.

Also, on the square ones...people that I have read about using them they sometimes just hold the filter in front of the lens with their free hand....no holder....it's faster that way.

Greg Loc: Maryland

Not quite correct. Yes you will buy adapter rings for each size lense (at about 2 to 10 bucks a pop) but only one filter holder which will attach to said adapter ring on each lens. I prefer square to round for 'creative filters' such as ND or Graduated ND. I also have never found a round reverse graduated ND (somebody probably does make one though). If you go the filter holder route, you will still have a circular CP, but it fits the filter holder so you won't screw it onto the lens. With this solution, you only have one adapter per lens, all your filters fit all your lenses (with possible exceptions being extreme fisheye lenses which no filter will fit and extremely large aperture telephoto lenses which use internal filters). Buying a large round filter and using adapter rings works, but if you have a large filter (which presumably you would) and a small lense, you will need to use multiple adapter rings. This will work, but is a less 'elegant' solution. Also if you have a ring get stuck, you may not be able to use that filter until you get a filter wrench to remove it. Also, as you mentioned, the holder give you a little more creative freedom in your composition as you can move the filters up and down in the holder to adjust it's position in the frame. Something not possible with a round filter.

Willy Loc: Alaska

Both.
I agree with others about using a large CP and step up rings to fit all your lenses.
The square GD's are much better than round ones. With a round GD the transition line will always in the center and I seldom find the center the correct placement. I don't use a holder for the square filters, I just hand hold them in front of the lens.
These filters are imperative for landscapes.
Here's a good blog post about their use.
http://www.my-photo-blog.com/graduated-neutral-density-filters

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

Greg wrote:

"Not quite correct. Yes you will buy adapter rings for each size lense (at about 2 to 10 bucks a pop) but only one filter holder which will attach to said adapter ring on each lens. I prefer square to round for 'creative filters' such as ND or Graduated ND."

Ummm Greg, I am perfectly correct in what I stated, you have simply not understood what you read, there is your problem.

I wrote that a filter holder will need to be purchased and adapter rings for each different lens. What you failed to read was that there is singular and plural wording in that sentence and that was quite intentional.

I stated a filter holder (as in one filter holder, otherwise I would have written filter holder(S) for multiple holders) because they would only need one filter holder sized for the largest ring they will be buying, and I wrote "adapter rings" (as in several rings, not just one) because they would need to buy one for each different size lens they had.

By the way Greg, there is no "E" on the end of the word lens, it is simply lens, not lense.

Greg Loc: Maryland

Then you are correct. You wording made it sound otherwise. Yes, I know there is no e on lens, as is apparent for the dozen other times lens was written in the post without an e. Actually upon rereading it seems as in interspersed with and without. Guess touch typing quickly has disadvantages. This actually just caused to me look it up wondering why my spell check did not catch it. Apparently, both spellings are correct depending on the source. Obviously, lens it the traditionally accepted way to spell, but lense is not incorrect. I learned something new.

pigpen

The answer: Circle & Rectangle.

I own B+W round filters. The CPL, warming, a few UV, and 2 grades of ND filters. All 77mm.

The Singh Ray 4x6 Graduated ND filters are awesome, if you need them. They are not cheap, ($160 each). I have a 2 stop and 3 stop, and they can be stacked if needed. I use them for mostly waterfalls, and the occasional sunset/sunrise. The Hoya 77mm ring ($25), and the Hoya holder ($75), are required. (Well not the 77mm if that is not your filter size). The benefit to these over the round Graduated ND filters, is they can be slid up and down to meet the horizon. With the round, you must compose the shot to fit the filter. Also, if stacking the 2, I can have one at a different level (up or down), if the light is heavier in one spot. The advantage to the square (4x4), is the extra 2 inches you have to be able to adjust the level to the lighting situation. They have made my waterfall photography so much easier. I have owned these before I went digital. Many people will argue that due to software (HDR ect.), they are not needed. But I paid a lot of money for them, so damn it, I'm going to use them. All joking aside, even with HDR, they make the pp less time consuming.

This is quite an investment for just a few shooting ops.

twowindsbear

Hi, Greg - I'm curious ... what is a 'reverse graduated ND' filter - either round or square?

I like to think that I know a little about photography, but this is a new item for me.

Thanks

Greg Loc: Maryland

A standard graduated ND filter is used for landscapes where the sky is much brighter than the ground. When shooting sunrises and sunsets, the horizon is much brigher than either the ground or the sky. A revers ND grad starts dark in the middle and fades out near the top rahter than fading in from no filter to dark at the top.

http://www.singh-ray.com/reversegrads.html