Newbie Help! ND Filters + Grad Filters

K

Kyle.

Suspended / Banned
Messages
19
Name
Kyle
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone im new here! Im after some advice ive just got an EOS 400D and i want to take longer exposure photos off streams waterfalls etc, whats best to use an ND filter or Grad?

Could these also be used to take scenery shots ie capture cloud detail?

Thanks everyone!
 
Simple one this - they're both the same, but a graduated one starts dark and by around halfway down is completely clear. It's for photographing (for instance) the bright sky over dark land, where the brightness in the image isn't balanced evenly.

For a waterfall, you want a non-graduated one. For cloud detail, you probably do too unless you are also featuring the landscape.
 
Ah right cool, yea i will be featuring the landscape too.
 
Kyle,

You may want to consider a filter kit, Cokin, Hitech and Lee (cheapest to most exspensive) all do one. The filters come in either 85mm wide or 100mm wide, obviously the 100mm are quite a bit more expensive but are better for ultra wide lenses. This consists of a ring adaptor (fits filter holder to lens), a filter holder (holds the filter) and a filter (piece of glass plastic with various uses). The benifits of a kit like this, over a screw in filter) is you can stack filters and also adjust the height at which the horison is on the grad filter. You can buy various sized ring adaptors to fit to any of your lenses. The oly time I would say a screw in is better is when using big stoppers such as an 8 or 10 stop filter so that no light leaks occur.
 
Kyle. said:
Hi everyone im new here! Im after some advice ive just got an EOS 400D and i want to take longer exposure photos off streams waterfalls etc, whats best to use an ND filter or Grad?

Could these also be used to take scenery shots ie capture cloud detail?

Thanks everyone!
Click to expand...

Welcome to TP :)

An ND filter and an ND Grad are completely different, and used for completely different purposes. ND Grads are for darkening skies, but that's not what you're asking.

A straight ND filter is used to reduce the exposure. The common application is to make the shutter speed longer so you can do those milky waterfalls etc you're talking about, but they're also good for using in bright light when you want a low f/number for shallow depth of field effects but the camera runs out of high enough shutter speeds.

They come in various strengths, and are often marked in different ways relating to stops of reduction of light (a 'stop' is any halving or doubling of exposure). So a 1 stop ND would reduce the light by 50% and might be marked x2 which is the exposure factor, or 0.3 which is the optical density; 2 stops would be x4 or 0.6; 3 stops x8 or 0.9. Note this last one which is quite common and people think it's 8 stops but ND8 is only three stops. They go right up to 10 stops which is x1024 or 3.0.

So the one you want depends both on the brightness of the daylight and the effect you want. Waterfalls and fountains move quite quickly and 1/4sec will often give quite a blurred/milky effect. If it's not too bright, you might be able to get that without any filter by using the lowest ISO and a high f/number. Or a 3-stops ND8 will probably be okay. Lots of these around.

At the other extreme, if you want to turn the sea to milky glass, have clouds streak across the sky and make people disappear from busy streets, then you'll need a very long shutter speed running into tens of seconds and a very dark ten-stops ND1000. That will reduce a normal exposure of say 1/125sec to eight full seconds, for example.

There are really only three of these really dark NDs worth getting. The B+W 110 is popular (screw fit) or the Lee Big Stopper (square mount) - they're both ten stops. The one I use is a LightCraft ND500 which nine stops, but I prefer it because it's multi-coated and cheaper - 77mm screw fit only though, from Premier-Ink (v good supplier) here http://www.premier-ink.co.uk/photog...raft-workshop-77mm-nd500mc-filter-p-2927.html

The other alternative is to use the glass from a welding mask, which can be had on ebay for about two quid! They're a bit of a faff to fit and use, but they do work if you want to play, and they're very dark - typically 10-15 stops.

There are lots of thread about using these very dark NDs and the welding glass if you run a search.
 
Sorry to throw in another question into this thread but I'm also looking to photograph waterfalls etc and was advised to get a polarised filter. Was this bad advise or is this another alternative to an ND filter?
 
if you want the grad effect you could always do it in photoshop and save the cash:thumbs:
 
Cris_L said:
Sorry to throw in another question into this thread but I'm also looking to photograph waterfalls etc and was advised to get a polarised filter. Was this bad advise or is this another alternative to an ND filter?
Click to expand...

A polorising filter will give you a slightly longer exposure, but not as much as an ND filter will. A poloriser is more used to cut out reflections and glare that you can get on water the sky and any other reflective surface. Some cheaper polorising filters wont be very good on wide angle lenses, they will leave extememly darkened corners. Also you will be wanting a circular polarising filter. :)
 
powell7 said:
if you want the grad effect you could always do it in photoshop and save the cash:thumbs:
Click to expand...

That will only work if you haven't burnt every single highlight out of the sky, which is very possible in some circumstances. I see the photoshop/LR technipue as more of a tweaker than a replacement for actual filters. Even if I have used a ND grad somtimes I will add another grad effect in light room if i feel it needs balancing.
 
Cris_L said:
Sorry to throw in another question into this thread but I'm also looking to photograph waterfalls etc and was advised to get a polarised filter. Was this bad advise or is this another alternative to an ND filter?
Click to expand...

No, that's not bad advice. A polariser will remove reflections off wet rocks and leaves, among other things, and will produce a more contrasty and much better image.

It will also have the effect of cutting the light down by about 2 stops, which is often enough to get the milky effect you're after.

Incidentally, waterfalls usually look better when photographed in cloudy conditions, which will also help you get what you want.

A shutter speed of 1/2 to 1 second will be fine, and probably obtainable under the above conditions.
 
when i did waterfall shots i used an ND4 and a polarizer together, the polarizer to cut out water refelections and the ND4 to reduce the overall light to drop the shutter speed down to blur the water. iirc a polarizer reduces the light by approx 1 1/3rd stops, and the ND4 by 2stops.
stacking filters on wide angle lenses often can cause vignetting on the corners of the frame so you have to be careful!
 
Cris_L said:
So for photographing waterfalls which one is best, polarised or ND? or would you ever use them both together? :shrug:
Click to expand...

They do different things. The polariser does what I explained above. The ND filter only reduces exposure overall. You COULD use them together, but it might not be necessary.

This is the sort of thing you just have to try out for yourself.

If you don't already own both filters, go for the polariser first. It's incredibly versatile and will improve your landscape photography no end.
 
Cris_L said:
So for photographing waterfalls which one is best, polarised or ND? or would you ever use them both together? :shrug:
Click to expand...

Cris, see my post above. It depends on the shutter speed you need, combined with the light level, and how much scope you have with regular exposure adjustments of f/number and ISO.

Most polarisers are a bit less than two stops overall (plus obviously a lot more on the areas that it polarises/darkens, but that's no help here). So if you're using it primarily to get a longer shutter speed it will only take you down from say 1/125sec to around 1/40sec, which is not much when you're looking for 1/4sec, or 1 sec or even 20 secs.

Basically a polariser is handy to have and might do the trick or could maybe be used in conjunction with another filter, perhaps the common/cheaper ND8 which would then give you almost 5 stops which is getting there. But a polariser on its own usually won't be enough.
 
Thanks guys, there are so many ifferent bits available its so hard to know what to buy and whats not needed till further down the line..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top