Variable ND Filter vs. a set of ND Filters: I am having trouble deciding between a variable vs. a set of ND filters as my first set of ND filters. I need to get an adapter as the two...

skornfeld

I am having trouble deciding between a variable vs. a set of ND filters as my first set of ND filters. I need to get an adapter as the two main lens I use on my Nikon 7200 are a 16-80 Nikon (82mm) and a 18-300 Tamron (67mm) plus I imagine I will be buying another lens soon which of course won't match either of those. I realize I need to get an adapter to use either one on both lens. The variable is 2-8 stops vs a set of regular ND filters which I can stack. Also any recommended brands that also offer the adapter for different lens sizes?

I have done some research and went to the local camera shop where I bought the camera. He showed me variable which did 2-8 stops and was $259 without the adapter kit which seemed like a lot of money for a hobbyist. It seems hard to tell on B&H which companies also make the adapter for their filters.

Thanks

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

After a discussion with a tech at B+W, I decided against Variable ND filters. They have an inherent problem with uneven transmission of light that forms an X pattern at various settings. It is the nature of two polarizing filters trying to work with each other. Some are more pronounced than others, but they all possess the same characteristics. I opted for several ND filters of varying densities. One can always stack them as the densities are additive.
--Bob

skornfeld wrote:

I am having trouble deciding between a variable vs... (show quote)

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

Look at Lee or Cokin filters. The square sets have a holder (for three filters) and slide on to a variety of lens mounts (so in future need you just buy the right lens mount). A graduated filter allows you to tone down a skyline.Variable filter? cannot see the reason for that...a little vignette in PP would perhaps do the same?...People like 'the big stopper' 8 stop....to get that milky sea, The smaller ones slow traffic or 'lose' the people.

Some suggest that Cokin have a grey tint but others disagree. Depending on what you intend using them for it may or may not be a problem (if it is)

Have fun

skornfeld

G Brown wrote:

Look at Lee or Cokin filters. The square sets have... (show quote)

have you had a problem with vignetting using a wide angle with the square?

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

skornfeld wrote:

I am having trouble deciding between a variable vs... (show quote)

I use a 10 stop filter. cause it is so easy to use. I set my exposure using ISO, aperture, to get and exposure at 1/30 sec. I then attach my 10 stop filter and change my shutter speed only to 30 sec. Make sure you cover your eyepiece and set your lens to manual focus.

Haydon

skornfeld wrote:

have you had a problem with vignetting using a wide angle with the square?

No problem with Lee GND's or ND but I have the wide angle ring for my 16-35. I won't use a polarizer on my UWA. It's too risky with unevenness. Best suited on the 24mm and up.
As other have indicated, I don't think it's wise using a variable. Some have success but I haven't been one of them.

skornfeld

Thanks everyone - seems pretty unambiguous, no variable

tgreenhaw

You can always try a < $20 Neweer variable found on Amazon. I've never seen the fabled X pattern on mine, but I know it will occur in certain situations.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

skornfeld wrote:

I am having trouble deciding between a variable vs... (show quote)

The price and the X of the variable leave me cold. I use straight ND filters.

peterg Loc: Santa Rosa, CA

rmalarz wrote:

They have an inherent problem with uneven transmission of light that forms an X pattern at various settings.

I think the X pattern is caused by adjusting the density more than the filter's design value. The lower quality the filter the worse the problem. Personally, I use my fixed ND filters more than my variable one.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

From the discussion I had with the B+W technician, the X is a product of the polarization and f-stop. Certain combinations of those two things cause the issue. As a result, people can use these filters without a problem and swear by them. Others will hit that "magic" combination and swear at them. As explained, there are so many variables that the issue can be unpredictable. That alone diminished my desire to purchase one to zero. I'd hate to travel for a day, shoot some photos, travel back, develop the images and find an X in any of them.
--Bob

peterg wrote:

I think the X pattern is caused by adjusting the density more than the filter's design value. The lower quality the filter the worse the problem. Personally, I use my fixed ND filters more than my variable one.

peterg Loc: Santa Rosa, CA

rmalarz wrote:

From the discussion I had with the B+W technician, the X is a product of the polarization and f-stop. Certain combinations of those two things cause the issue.

Interesting. Fortunately, I've seen the "X" before shooting. A faint "X" would be hard to spot in the camera's viewfinder and difficult to remove in post processing. Assuming one opts for fixed ND filters, the question is how many does one need? The regular polarizing filter can serve as one; perhaps a 6-stop and 10-stop could suffice and be cheaper than a good variable ND filter.

skornfeld

peterg wrote:

Interesting. Fortunately, I've seen the "X" before shooting. A faint "X" would be hard to spot in the camera's viewfinder and difficult to remove in post processing. Assuming one opts for fixed ND filters, the question is how many does one need? The regular polarizing filter can serve as one; perhaps a 6-stop and 10-stop could suffice and be cheaper than a good variable ND filter.

Hadn't thought about using the polarizing one as one of them. Meter with the polarized one and then adjust for the nd filters - interesting

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

We use a polarizer in conjunction with the Hi-Tech brand of rectangular ND grads. The ND Grads fit perfectly in the Colin P wide angle filter holder. For straight ND filters, we use 3 stop Marumi screw-on filters.

www.spiritvisionphotography.com

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

My experience with the Singh-Ray variable ND was actually quite good with my Nikon D200, D700 and D600... but I did get the dreaded "X" (what the folks at Singh-Ray called a "Maltese cross") on my Fuji X-T1. This was with multiple lenses on all cameras over time, so I think the cross problem relates to the combination of the polarizing foil used in the filters used in the variable ND ( since that is how they work-two Circular polarizers spinning against each other to increase density) and the specific imaging chip in the camera, most likely the spacing between photo sites.

That said, for an SLR type camera can be very convenient, since you can twist the filter for minimum density and us be able to frame your shot, and then twist back to get your eight stops. Because you will not be able to see anything from your view finder with an eight or 10 stop ND.

One possible solution to this convenience issue could be to use Xume's magnetic filter rings - with these you can easily pop filters on and off the lens without fear of missed writing or wasting time.