Understanding ND filters

Bobby uk

Suspended / Banned
Messages
771
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys just started looking into some nd filters and was really just after some advice on what there for and what to get. I want to use a slow shutter speed in the day and i assume that the filters help me control the over exposure problem that occurs if i do not use them. Im after a set for my canon 28-135 IS which i believe is a 72mm?
 
My n00b answer: is "it depends" I expect. What sort of things are you photographing in the day that you want to use a slower shutter speed on?
I suspect that a 3 stopper is a reasonable starting point.
But if you want the blurred clouds or smoothed out water look then you may want 9 or 10 "stoppers" as they're called.
When I say "stopper" I mean the amount of reduction in exposure the filter gives. e.g if you had a 1/30th second exposure but wanted 1/15th then 1 "stop" reduction is required. To go from 1/15 to 30 seconds would need a 10 stopper. (if Ive got my maths right!)
Then there's the issue of do you want a slot in or screw on the end type filter.
And how much you may want to spend. The "ultimate" is the Lee big stopper, whilst the cheapest is a bit of welding glass rubber banded over your lens.

Hopefully someone a bit more lucid will come along and explain better!

Some more information here
 
Last edited:
was just having a look and my next question was 'what type of filter' i see you can get a filter that rotates to cover 1-12+ stopper (ebay - 72mm Fader Neutral Density Adjustable Variable ND Filter ND2 to ND400) or as you suggested a frame that you slot different ones into?
 
Last edited:
As I understand it, the shorter your focal length lens, the worse the variable density ones behave. I'd hang on for someone more knowlegeable drops in here. All my input is theoretical only. You want someone who's actually used them.
Personally I dont think I'd buy a variable one.
 
Hi guys just started looking into some nd filters and was really just after some advice on what there for and what to get. I want to use a slow shutter speed in the day and i assume that the filters help me control the over exposure problem that occurs if i do not use them. Im after a set for my canon 28-135 IS which i believe is a 72mm?

My advice would be to go on ebay and buy a really cheap screw on set from China. You'll probably get a ND2, 4 and 8 for just a few £. Yes, they'll be crap (actually they may even be good enough, I have some and they are :D) but the point would be to use them to learn what you want to get and how you want to use them and then you can buy a decent set. Maybe a square filter/holder system.

Just checked and you can buy a cheap set on ebay for £10 plus pennies.
 
A good starter kit is the kood nd set from premier inks. I have both hard and soft nds as it depends what is in the scene.

You're talking about ND GRADUATED filters if you mention hard and soft - the OP is after ND filters that are the same density across the whole area. Quite different and used for different purposes.

To the OP - first thing is to understand densities - how dark the filter is. 1 stop cuts the light by a half, 2 stops to a quarter of the original amount, 3 stops to an eighth and so on. You will also see them as 0.3, 0.6 and 0.9 - this is equivalent to 1 stop, 2 stops and 3 stops respectively. You can get them darker as well - the "Big Stopper" 10 stop filters that will reduce it to around 1,000th of the amount - even more.

Why would you use them? Firstly to give you a longer shutter speed than you would otherwise have had or, often neglected, to allow you to open up the aperture to help reduce depth of field more than you would otherwise have been able to do.

General rule of thumb is avoid the cheap variable ND filters - they can leave all kind of unwanted artefacts on the image - they're effectively two polarisers - so might give you those effects when you don't want them.

Best advice - buy a low cost set - but not the cheapest - say £10-£15 off e-bay. See what you use most often and then look at a more expensive specific option from the likes of B&W, Lee and so forth.
 
You're talking about ND GRADUATED filters if you mention hard and soft - the OP is after ND filters that are the same density across the whole area. Quite different and used for different purposes.

To the OP - first thing is to understand densities - how dark the filter is. 1 stop cuts the light by a half, 2 stops to a quarter of the original amount, 3 stops to an eighth and so on. You will also see them as 0.3, 0.6 and 0.9 - this is equivalent to 1 stop, 2 stops and 3 stops respectively. You can get them darker as well - the "Big Stopper" 10 stop filters that will reduce it to around 1,000th of the amount - even more.

Why would you use them? Firstly to give you a longer shutter speed than you would otherwise have had or, often neglected, to allow you to open up the aperture to help reduce depth of field more than you would otherwise have been able to do.

General rule of thumb is avoid the cheap variable ND filters - they can leave all kind of unwanted artefacts on the image - they're effectively two polarisers - so might give you those effects when you don't want them.

Best advice - buy a low cost set - but not the cheapest - say £10-£15 off e-bay. See what you use most often and then look at a more expensive specific option from the likes of B&W, Lee and so forth.

... controlling the over exposure areas in the day will be the sky.. if he wishes to slow the exposure he will firstly have to balance the image then lover the light levels across the image. Thus needing both types otherwise the sky will still be blown out. And the kit gives you both types
 
Hi guys just started looking into some nd filters and was really just after some advice on what there for and what to get. I want to use a slow shutter speed in the day and i assume that the filters help me control the over exposure problem that occurs if i do not use them. Im after a set for my canon 28-135 IS which i believe is a 72mm?

It sounds like you want an extreme ND filter - for milky water effects? Something around 8-10 stops then. Ten stops is also expressed as ND 3.0 or x1000 (ND8 is only three stops).

Suggest you don't get a variable one. Haida are very good value - check out this long thread http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=337439
 
so am i better off getting nd 10 screw on filter.
 
so am i better off getting nd 10 screw on filter.

Short answer, yes.

The main reason to use rectangular 'system' filters is so that ND Grads (darker at the top, fading to clear - used to darken bright skies) can be slid up and down to better position the dark/light transition line.

Apart from that, square filters are bigger and cumbersome (and can be expensive) and usually not as high quality as screw-in if you're picky about these things.
 
Last edited:
I do use a variable ND, but a descent one is not cheap (~$300 if I recall) and it will give banding if used on an UWA. I like them because I can focus and then set the density and it's infinitely adjustable.

I think the suggestion for Haida non variable is a good one. But I'd get a set so you have variability...But don't forget that you can get "some" variability from any ND w/ camera settings.

I'd also suggest getting the filters that will fit the largest diameter lens you own (or may eventually own). Then get step up rings for your smaller lenses.
 
One other thing...
I have no use for graduated ND's...I'd rather combine multiple exposures. And you don't "have to have" an ND to get "long exposure blur." For rare/occasional use you can just take multiple exposures and exposure blend them to get the same effect. But it may take combining 10 or more exposures...
 
Last edited:
Short answer, yes.

The main reason to use rectangular 'system' filters is so that ND Grads (darker at the top, fading to clear - used to darken bright skies) can be slid up and down to better position the dark/light transition line.

Apart from that, square filters are bigger and cumbersome (and can be expensive) and usually not as high quality as screw-in if you're picky about these things.

All that is true but personally I went for a filter holder system so that I could use it with all of my lenses of differing thread size via the usual adapters. I suppose you could buy a BIG screw on filter and step up rings for smaller lenses and as the OP only asks about a filter for one specific lens maybe a more flexible answer isn't needed.
 
One other thing...
I have no use for graduated ND's...I'd rather combine multiple exposures. And you don't "have to have" an ND to get "long exposure blur." For rare/occasional use you can just take multiple exposures and exposure blend them to get the same effect. But it may take combining 10 or more exposures...

Sounds like a lot of hand work ... surprising that you said that as alot of people on here rave about pp time but id rather use nd grads to reduce the time at the pc
 
Short answer, yes.

With a screw on 10 stopper though is there not the problem of it being so dark the camera can't focus accurately? Meaning you have to focus first, switch to manual focus if you werent already, then screw the filter on without inadvertently changing the focus in the process.

With the square, filter holder, slide down in front system, all you have to do is focus(switch to manual), then slide the filter down with no need to touch the lens and risk de focussing.

Having said that, at least with the screw on filter you know you're not going to get any light leaking round the edge. A cheaper slot in system might not be so light-tight as it could be.
 
Sounds like a lot of hand work ... surprising that you said that as alot of people on here rave about pp time but id rather use nd grads to reduce the time at the pc

It is "more" hand work, but masking 2 layers together is not a lot of effort. The reason I prefer it is because there is almost always somethng in the transition area of a grad that I'd rather not have darkened.

The exposure blending is more tedious (aligning, setting opacity for every layer) but if you only want to do the occasional long exposure it might be worth it for the money savings (or if you don't happen to have your ND with you).
 
Last edited:
It is "more" hand work, but masking 2 layers together is not a lot of effort. The reason I prefer it is because there is almost always somethng in the transition area of a grad that I'd rather not have darkened.

The exposure blending is more tedious (aligning, setting opacity for every layer) but if you only want to do the occasional long exposure it might be worth it for the money savings (or if you don't happen to have your ND with you).

I blend myself but a couple of exposures... 10 is a lil extreme :s
 
I have got a half decent (screw on) 10stop filter but find it a bit to harsh sometimes, so thought maybe a cheap set of all the stops would maybe get the taste buds going but without spending £££££
 
I blend myself but a couple of exposures... 10 is a lil extreme :s
It depends on "why" you're blending. You can exposure blend multiple images to create the long exposure look if you don't have a ND...that requires more exposures (and a different blending technique).
My UWA is a 14-24; filters are very expensive for it, and just a PITA... For how often *I* want to use a ND with it I'd rather just use a "workaround" even if it is more effort/time (although I'm considering adding a 16-35mm for that reason).
Exposure blending for not having a ND grad requires a lot fewer images...
 
I have got a half decent (screw on) 10stop filter but find it a bit to harsh sometimes, so thought maybe a cheap set of all the stops would maybe get the taste buds going but without spending £££££
For that money, what do you have to loose? Why not?
Honestly, I think people tend to get way too wrapped up in little details (color shift/micro contrast) when it ultimately doesn't matter much for what they are doing...
 
It depends on "why" you're blending. You can exposure blend multiple images to create the long exposure look if you don't have a ND...that requires more exposures (and a different blending technique).
My UWA is a 14-24; filters are very expensive for it, and just a PITA... For how often *I* want to use a ND with it I'd rather just use a "workaround" even if it is more effort/time (although I'm considering adding a 16-35mm for that reason).
Exposure blending for not having a ND grad requires a lot fewer images...

I blend as sometimes I dnt wana stack 3 filters for sunrise as I have a UWA thus can use two. I also blend to make dark shadows more subtle. I dont think blending is a substitute for NDs its a tool to use with them.
 
I blend as sometimes I dnt wana stack 3 filters for sunrise as I have a UWA thus can use two. I also blend to make dark shadows more subtle. I dont think blending is a substitute for NDs its a tool to use with them.
Whatever works for you. I use it instead of ND's (particularly grads).
But I do have both a variable ND and a Grad for most of my lenses.
 
For that money, what do you have to loose? Why not?
Honestly, I think people tend to get way too wrapped up in little details (color shift/micro contrast) when it ultimately doesn't matter much for what they are doing...

Im not saying its ideal but surley you can compensate for these problems in processing?
Dont get me wrong and I know you get what you pay for but some of the good ones are well out of my price range!
 
Just bought the same set myself this week, Rob. Not tried it yet, but hopefully next week. I'll report back! :cautious::whistle:
ok good stuff let me know what you think
 
Back
Top