Adjustable Neutral Density Filter
Nov 23, 2016 08:01:42 #
jims203 wrote:
I have a Singhray variable I have used on several Nikon bodies and lens. It always performs well. Esp useful on waterfalls.
Nov 23, 2016 08:41:18 #
photoman022
Loc: Manchester CT USA
I use an adjustable NDF and (overall) it works well; the only problem is that the darker you adjust the filter the more vignetting there is at the edges. I use my NDF for waterfalls (mostly) and will go wider than normal to adjust for the vignetting so I can crop my photo in pp.
My NDF adjusts to 10 stops of light; you need to focus the lens, set it to manual focus, and then take the photograph.
My NDF adjusts to 10 stops of light; you need to focus the lens, set it to manual focus, and then take the photograph.
Nov 23, 2016 08:41:27 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Considering the price, I've avoided them. ...
Some give weird Cross density effects.... As Jerry suggests buy even a low cost set of ND filters and you can stack them. If you are a guy who suddenly only takes ND photos then invest $, but until then low cost will do.
WHAT LOW COST FILTERS. YIKES!!! Yes, low cost filters... People get all hung up in IQ... Story and general impression beats IQ hands down. An old 4mp quality camera like the Canon G2 with all its faults will give you an 8x10 and many programs do a fantastic job of enlarging the pix count like Photozoom clasic. Reviews claim 1000x the pix count?!
http://www.benvista.com/store
For a question like this one.. a waste of time for UHH... has been covered so many times the paint is chipping off by shear weight...
USE SEARCH FIRST.... OLD TOPIC (search is at the top of the UHH page)
ALSO USE GOOGLE FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON THEM....
Nov 23, 2016 09:01:33 #
I have 2 variable nd's use, I have no issues with them. Will have to look at brand, they were not cheap.
Nov 23, 2016 09:12:46 #
Shoeless_Photographer wrote:
Hmmm...I have more than one CP filter. Are you saying I could just stack a couple of those and get the same effect as a variable ND filter?
Yes, that is exactly what I am implying - give it a try! If you hold two polarizing filters on-axis and twist one while holding the other still you will see the "variable ND effect right before your very eyes.
And the value (such as it can be) of the variable type is for those with SLR type cameras who want to use very dark (8-10 stop) versions - when you put that 9 stop ND filter on the lens you can no longer see anything in the viewfinder. SO the procedure you have to do is 1)frame the shot (on a tripod, of course), 2)screw on the filter, 3) take the exposure and 4) remove filter in order to reframe a new shot. This can be a real PITA if you're in a difficult place, like a beach.
Nov 23, 2016 09:19:35 #
dpullum wrote:
Some give weird Cross density effects.... As Jerry... (show quote)
Why is this question a waste of time? Just because it has been discussed before? My guess is that a whole host of questions might never get asked if the questioners thought they would be chastised for asking them. Of course we can google. Of course we can search the UHH database. But that removes the comradery of the forum concept. If you don't want to answer the question or think the topic has been beaten to death, then don't open the topic. Go sit in your google corner and enjoy your solitude.
Nov 23, 2016 09:34:03 #
catchlight..
Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway
I have Tiffen and found it important to stay within the range markings. Stops are marked on the outer ring and it can be dialed under or beyond the cross limits to create artifacts. That can happen if turned randomly without looking at the scale. Performance is very good with no artifacts from my experience if you stay within the scale. Works well with the Canon 50 f/1.2L lenses in bright light to reduce shutter speed at wide open and is an alternate way to fine tune the exposure quickly. Waterfalls come out great also. I do have a Hoya 4 and 8 and see no difference but maybe others have with other brands or camera/ lenses. I do like the convenience and flexibility when used at the lower end with the 1.2.
Nov 23, 2016 09:39:12 #
I bought a cheap one when I bought my first camera. when you buy cheap you get cheap but it was great to learn how it works. I now have a set of filters but still from time to time play with the variable . I would buy another but next time I'll buy quality....
Nov 23, 2016 09:45:23 #
I called and spoke with a technical rep. at Schneider Optical with regard to a variable ND filter produced by their B+W facility. I was told that they work, but with varying degrees of success. The f-stop chosen may or may not produce a cross or X pattern of light / dark depending. People who do use them find that they can do so, but only after determining which f-stop combinations work and which don't.
As a result of that conversation, I abandoned ever wanting a Variable ND filter and chose to purchase high quality B+W nano coated Kaesemann ND filters.
--Bob
As a result of that conversation, I abandoned ever wanting a Variable ND filter and chose to purchase high quality B+W nano coated Kaesemann ND filters.
--Bob
teeford wrote:
Do they work satisfactorily, or should I buy a set of fixed filters?
Nov 23, 2016 09:55:57 #
dpullum wrote:
Some give weird Cross density effects.... As Jerry... (show quote)
Other people read UHH besides yourself and most have given polite answers except for of course yourself. Personally I found this thread very informative. Luckily UHH has an ignore list and you now have the honor of being on mine.
Nov 23, 2016 11:50:05 #
stillducky wrote:
Other people read UHH besides yourself and most have given polite answers except for of course yourself. Personally I found this thread very informative. Luckily UHH has an ignore list and you now have the honor of being on mine.
Valid comment Stillducky... Here is why we should not Opine on technical issues and should rather check for valid technical treatments. Opinions are valid to an extent. But if one is just interested in chatting fine.... but if issues are to be resolved, then some degree of research should be done, which is my point... if we have covered the question 30 time +++ then easy to muddle the clarity of the issue.. question.
I was not trying to be impolite, rather was saying do some research and then report the findings and then ask UHH buddies their experience regarding the conclusions presented.
Often a simple google search gives us answers that come from somewhat controlled semi-scientific tests. One quick example:
http://www.ronmartblog.com/2015/01/comparison-variable-neutral-density.html
Or here is a low cost Newer brand filter test on you-tube.... 77mm for $12 on Amazon tested... a good start filter to see if one for big $$ and become famous for taking only ND filters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQ87WIn9Ulo
Nov 23, 2016 12:45:46 #
I got one to use on a Tokina 17-35, which I use on a full frame camera.
At very wide angles it creates ugly aberations. At more normal angles they are fine.
At very wide angles it creates ugly aberations. At more normal angles they are fine.
Nov 23, 2016 13:19:13 #
Variable ND's and CPL's haven't worked well for me for less than 24mm on a full frame. In these cases I will either bracket exposures and blend images or use my Lee Graduated ND's. It didn't take long to realize that there are limitations. I have dedicated 3, 6, 10 stop ND's for my long exposure work. Buy it once and buy it right.
stillducky , if people bother you from what they say, remember, the only people that should get to you are people that matter. I know it doesn't always work, but I try to just move on and not waste my time typing my discontent. It's time you never will get back.
stillducky , if people bother you from what they say, remember, the only people that should get to you are people that matter. I know it doesn't always work, but I try to just move on and not waste my time typing my discontent. It's time you never will get back.
Nov 23, 2016 14:31:53 #
I have had one! It's now swimming in the river with the fish, so make your own mind up 😮
Nov 23, 2016 22:59:46 #
Correction: Kaesemann foil is used in polarizing filters, NOT ND filters. Just not enough coffee this morning before posting this reply. However, B+W is still my first choice for filters.
--Bob
--Bob
rmalarz wrote:
I called and spoke with a technical rep. at Schnei... (show quote)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.