Which 10 stop? Lee or Firecrest?

GHP

GHP

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,864
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm fancying a go with a 10 stopper ND filter.
I have a Lee filter holder , the 100mm one, and am after a bit of a nudge in the right direction.
I've heard the Firecrest are more neutral, and they seem to be around the same cost as the Lee.
Googling seems to bring up similar for's and against's for each.
It's over to you !
 
No contest, the Firecrest is neutral, the Lee Big Stopper, far from it, has a distinct blue cast.
 
Just to throw a spanner in the works the Zomei 10 stop is well worth a look at. I have a couple of FC filters (16 stop, .9 SG) and i have no complaints with the Zomei 10 stop.
 
Do Zomei make a square one, or are they screw in, as I can only find the screw type?
 
Steve B said:
No contest, the Firecrest is neutral, the Lee Big Stopper, far from it, has a distinct blue cast.
Click to expand...

This is what I am reading in quite a few places.
 
My Firecrest 10 stopper has no noticeable cast at all, it's really rather great.
 
Sharky said:
Square, i use the NISI v5 100mm system and have the Zomei 6 and 10 stop 100mm.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Filters-10...21_tr_t_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=539J1AZTFMA21ZG92DC9
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'm clearly not very good at searching ! Although there are a few reports of magenta cast with the Zomei filters. Better than most, but not as neutral as the Firecrest.

markyboy.1967 said:
Do yourself a favour and buy a Progrey 10 stop- better than Lee and Firecrest( more nuetral).
Click to expand...

I thought I had it down to just 2 choices, but I will have a look. Thanks.

macvisual said:
Do 'Firecrest' make a 6 stopper instead of the 10 I wonder? I feel a 10 stopper is too much overkill at times.
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, I was having the same thought. I wonder if a 6 stop would be a better option. This is my first foray into Long exposures, and I may well end up with both, but as a starting point, which one?

Nawty said:
My Firecrest 10 stopper has no noticeable cast at all, it's really rather great.
Click to expand...

This is almost exclusively what I hear about them TBH.

Thanks all for taking the time to read, and respond.
 
I tend to use my Lee little stopper more than the big stopper.. If I was to buy again I'd try the Firecrest as the Lee has a very blue cast which you can correct post but is a pain.
 
Sharky said:
Just to throw a spanner in the works the Zomei 10 stop is well worth a look at. I have a couple of FC filters (16 stop, .9 SG) and i have no complaints with the Zomei 10 stop.
Click to expand...
I also have the Zomei and have used the LEE 10 big stopper, the Zomie is perfectly neutral and will cost a fraction of the price of both the Firecrest and Lee . You can find the 100mm version on Amazon.
 
Yes marked difference between the 6 stop Lee and the 10 stop Lee in terms of colour cast. To me the 6 stop is pretty neutral, or at least I don't see any cast that makes me want to change it. Blue cast on the 10 stop is very noticeable. Surprisingly sometimes it enhances an image but not very often. Whenever I use the 10 stop i set the white balance to around 9500 K and that sorts it for me.
 
Another vote for the Firecrest's..

I use a 7 and a 16 stop (both 100mm in Lee holder) and Missus has a 10 stop 85mm and 16 stop screw in. All are really good.

In fact, just about to buy a 4 stop today :)
 
Typical !
I ask a simple A or B question, and the answers thrown up include C,D & E !!;)
I'm very grateful for the input from all of you. Thanks.
It seems the cast which is so often quoted seems to be far more prominent in the 10 stop and stronger filters, which of course makes sense.
The Firecrest seems to be the better at stopping the IR wavelength too, which is another factor.
However, now I'm not sure whether the 10 or the 6 stop is the one to try.
Initially, I will be using it for seascapes (mostly), so I'm swinging round to the view of the 6 stop.
Purely because the 10 stop seems to "smooth" the water/waves just a touch too much.
Any sea/coastal landscapers here have any thoughts on the 6 Vs. 10 debate?
And Thanks again all.
 
I shoot a lot of seascapes (lot of it down here in Cornwall :)), honest answer is - depends on the light.

In general, I use my 7 stop far more than my 16. The 7 usually allows for a 1/2- 1 1/2 second exposure, which gives nice movement. I use the 16 if I want to flatten it out completely.

Before I had my current 100mm system, I used a 67mm system on a smaller camera. Then I had a 6, 10 and 16 stop Firecrest. I found I hardly ever used the 10 which is why I haven't bothered with one for my 100mm set up.

I went for a 7 over a six for two reasons. Firstly, when I ordered the 7 was £30 cheaper than the 6 on Amazon, secondly I usually shoot at 100 ISO and figured I could use the 7 as a 10 if needed by using ISO 800.
 
GHP said:
Any sea/coastal landscapers here have any thoughts on the 6 Vs. 10 debate?
Click to expand...
You'll probably need both and in my view a 10 stop would be the first one i pick up.

10 stop Zomei image i have handy:
IMG_1422.jpg
 
Wissel said:
...... secondly I usually shoot at 100 ISO and figured I could use the 7 as a 10 if needed by using ISO 800.
Click to expand...

Wrong way around, increasing the ISO by 4 stops would equate to a 3 stop filter;)

I'm another who prefers a 10 stop over a 6 stop, my 6 stop very rarely gets used when the sun is above the horizon, except for waterfalls.
 
The native colour cast of an ND filters is really irrelevant - what matters is colour accuracy after adjustment in post processing, throughout the spectrum. Lee's Big Stopper has a deliberate slight blue cast, because after post processing this gives better results than trying to do it with dyes in manufacture, with good infrared suppression. Or if you really want a more neutral colour in-camera, then do a custom white balance or set the WB manually, very easy really.

HiTech's Firecrest is different though, using an electrolytic metal coating process. Hoya ProND range is similar (screw-in only). This has undoubted advantages, the main one being native neutrality that extends into the invisible infrared spectrum that can be a big problem with some extreme ND filters (inaccurate greens that can't be properly corrected, and brown shadows). The other advantage of Firecrest is the absence of vignetting that conventional dyed NDs suffer from when used with wide-angle lenses. Basically light from the edges of the frame passes through the filter at an angle, effectively making the filter thicker and darker. It's very noticeable with super-wides but the metal coating process avoids that :thumbs:
 
The only negative I have found with Firecrest filters is that you have to stick the foam gasket on yourself (already on with Lee). It can be a pain to get it right and finding another if you cock it up is a bit of a pain as well!
 
Wissel said:
I shoot a lot of seascapes (lot of it down here in Cornwall :)), honest answer is - depends on the light.

In general, I use my 7 stop far more than my 16. The 7 usually allows for a 1/2- 1 1/2 second exposure, which gives nice movement. I use the 16 if I want to flatten it out completely.

Before I had my current 100mm system, I used a 67mm system on a smaller camera. Then I had a 6, 10 and 16 stop Firecrest. I found I hardly ever used the 10 which is why I haven't bothered with one for my 100mm set up.

I went for a 7 over a six for two reasons. Firstly, when I ordered the 7 was £30 cheaper than the 6 on Amazon, secondly I usually shoot at 100 ISO and figured I could use the 7 as a 10 if needed by using ISO 800.
Click to expand...

Thanks for replying. I am coming down to Cornwall in 3 weeks time, for a trip to see my parents in Hayle, so this would be my first outing with it probably.
Yes, Godrevy is about to be done to death !!

Sharky said:
You'll probably need both and in my view a 10 stop would be the first one i pick up.

10 stop Zomei image i have handy:
View attachment 68188
Click to expand...

I think you're probably right, I will end up with more than one if the landscape bug bites, but a bit undecided as to which one first. After all, their cost is not just pennies!!
Like the shot BTW.

HoppyUK said:
The native colour cast of an ND filters is really irrelevant - what matters is colour accuracy after adjustment in post processing, throughout the spectrum. Lee's Big Stopper has a deliberate slight blue cast, because after post processing this gives better results than trying to do it with dyes in manufacture, with good infrared suppression. Or if you really want a more neutral colour in-camera, then do a custom white balance or set the WB manually, very easy really.

HiTech's Firecrest is different though, using an electrolytic metal coating process. Hoya ProND range is similar (screw-in only). This has undoubted advantages, the main one being native neutrality that extends into the invisible infrared spectrum that can be a big problem with some extreme ND filters (inaccurate greens that can't be properly corrected, and brown shadows). The other advantage of Firecrest is the absence of vignetting that conventional dyed NDs suffer from when used with wide-angle lenses. Basically light from the edges of the frame passes through the filter at an angle, effectively making the filter thicker and darker. It's very noticeable with super-wides but the metal coating process avoids that (y)
Click to expand...

Thanks for this Richard. I have read so much about the difficulties of correcting the colour cast from a dense ND filter , partly because the cast might not be totally even across the image.
(Bear with me, I might be talking B****x here)
My thinking was that due to the light changing across the frame, from different reflective/absorptive properties of different things in the view, and also the light changes due to the polarisation etc.
Obviously I'm talking about wide angle (20mm on FF).
This would result in differing amounts of IR across the frame, so a "mask" of WB correction would not correct evenly.
Or am I way overthinking this?
 
Dave Semmens said:
The only negative I have found with Firecrest filters is that you have to stick the foam gasket on yourself (already on with Lee). It can be a pain to get it right and finding another if you cock it up is a bit of a pain as well!
Click to expand...

I must confess, I was a bit surprised when I read about that.
I mean, for that money, I'd expect it to be finished !!
 
I rarely post any colour 10 or 6 Lee filter photographs, do the cast does not bother me.

Not had a Firecrest, though.

Cheers.
 
posiview said:
I rarely post any colour 10 or 6 Lee filter photographs, do the cast does not bother me.

Not had a Firecrest, though.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Yep, that works !
Out of interest, which of yours gets more use, 6 or 10 ?
 
Dave Semmens said:
The only negative I have found with Firecrest filters is that you have to stick the foam gasket on yourself (already on with Lee). It can be a pain to get it right and finding another if you cock it up is a bit of a pain as well!
Click to expand...
Yep i spoke to Formatt Hitech about that and their reasoning was not everyone wants to use the gasket. They shipped out a spare one foc and they do offer a 3 pack of spares for about £4 i think at the time if you really mess up.
 
GHP said:
I must confess, I was a bit surprised when I read about that.
I mean, for that money, I'd expect it to be finished !!
Click to expand...

I forget the full story, but in essence while they were being tested prior to release, several of those testing asked for the filters with no gasket. Not sure now what application they were being used for, but that led to them supplying without the gasket fitted. In fact, many of the early ones went out without any gaskets included by mistake, though they were quick to post out the gaskets when notified.

With regard to a 6 or 10 stop, I feel it is easier to compensate for a filter which is too dark, rather than the other way.
At base ISO, if it is too dark, you can compensate by opening the aperture or increasing the ISO the equivalent of 4 stops to let in more light to mimic a 6 stop.
The other way though, with a 6 stop, if you want to lengthen the exposure to mimic a 10 stop, you only have the option to close the aperture.

Of course, we all have different needs and shoot in different light, so your requirement will probably differ from mine.
 
GHP said:
<snip>

Thanks for this Richard. I have read so much about the difficulties of correcting the colour cast from a dense ND filter , partly because the cast might not be totally even across the image.
(Bear with me, I might be talking B****x here)
My thinking was that due to the light changing across the frame, from different reflective/absorptive properties of different things in the view, and also the light changes due to the polarisation etc.
Obviously I'm talking about wide angle (20mm on FF).
This would result in differing amounts of IR across the frame, so a "mask" of WB correction would not correct evenly.
Or am I way overthinking this?
Click to expand...

You're over-thinking it. A few years ago, the only decent ten-stoppers were Lee and B+W. Both had a colour cast, but gave good results after PP, particularly with regard to IR pollution that was a big problem with many others - notably HiTech as it happens, but Firecrest has fixed that.

Today, there are a lot of good NDs around, some v inexpensive. I hesitate to recommend some of them as quality control and high reject rate is one thing that pushes the price up from the bigger brands. And one thing I insist on with my own filters is decent multi-coating, and that is never cheap.

Edit: Haida are good, they do 100x100 too. I particularly rate their IRND with cool-looking pink coating! From CameraGearUK in Norwich, on ebay. http://www.haidaphoto.com/en/newsd.php?nid=69
 
Last edited:
I have used both Lee and Firecrest and settled with Lee. It is a lot about finding one that is accurate. My advice would be, when you buy one, get out and try it straight away, in as many of the conditions you will normally use it. If find it is no good ask for it to be swapped. I had heard Firecrest was good but tried 3 before sending them all back bacause colours were no good. Lee on the other hand are fine no cast and accurate colour represents.
 
Interesting thread this as I'll be looking at one of these filters also in the near future, great input everyone, appreciated. I've the Lee 100mm set-up myself.

I personally think a 10 stop is way too much in my eyes, so I'll be chasing a 6 stop in the near future. Great replies, keep them coming guys n' gals.

:)
 
out of interest at how many stops does the gasket become necessary? i presume you can get away without at the lower levels, ive only really used grads or screw in filters so its never really occurred to me before
 
macvisual said:
Interesting thread this as I'll be looking at one of these filters also in the near future, great input everyone, appreciated. I've the Lee 100mm set-up myself.

I personally think a 10 stop is way too much in my eyes, so I'll be chasing a 6 stop in the near future. Great replies, keep them coming guys n' gals.

:)
Click to expand...

I tend to agree. You don't need ten stops a lot of the time and the darker the filter, if there are any difficulties, they're made worse. With six stops, a lot of cameras are usable in live view pretty much as normal.

I see a lot of images with massively long exposure times, like several minutes when several seconds would give the same result. It depends on the speed of movement and subjects like waterfalls will blur at quite short shutter speeds relatively speaking, whereas clouds take longer, or if you need a few passes of waves.

TBH, I'm rather tired of the super-smooth sea look, with waves totally blurred out. Often a bit more texture makes it more interesting. Easy enough to try different exposure times. Actually, some of the best results I've ever seen have been double-exposures merged in post-processing - one long super-smooth exposure, overlaid with a much shorter one (even without a filter). You get the cloudy/milky thing of course, but then there's also detail and texture, too :thumbs: Looks great, and will have those camera club judges pulling their beards LOL
 
niko said:
out of interest at how many stops does the gasket become necessary? i presume you can get away without at the lower levels, ive only really used grads or screw in filters so its never really occurred to me before
Click to expand...

It varies a lot. Depends on filter density, what holder you're using, which slot, and whether there's bright light behind or to the side etc etc. Personally, I prefer screw-ins.
 
HoppyUK said:
It varies a lot. Depends on filter density, what holder you're using, which slot, and whether there's bright light behind or to the side etc etc. Personally, I prefer screw-ins.
Click to expand...
thank you,
 
HoppyUK said:
I tend to agree. You don't need ten stops a lot of the time and the darker the filter, if there are any difficulties, they're made worse. With six stops, a lot of cameras are usable in live view pretty much as normal.

I see a lot of images with massively long exposure times, like several minutes when several seconds would give the same result. It depends on the speed of movement and subjects like waterfalls will blur at quite short shutter speeds relatively speaking, whereas clouds take longer, or if you need a few passes of waves.

TBH, I'm rather tired of the super-smooth sea look, with waves totally blurred out. Often a bit more texture makes it more interesting. Easy enough to try different exposure times. Actually, some of the best results I've ever seen have been double-exposures merged in post-processing - one long super-smooth exposure, overlaid with a much shorter one (even without a filter). You get the cloudy/milky thing of course, but then there's also detail and texture, too (y) Looks great, and will have those camera club judges pulling their beards LOL
Click to expand...

I have no problems using live view on my Nikon with a 10 stopper. I discovered it by accident, though :oops: :$

I'd agree, some texture works well, but I do like a uber long exposure, with very flat sea :)

I've also produced some wonderful photographs doing what you say with a long exposure and then blend in with a shorter exposure.

Cheers.
 
HoppyUK said:
It varies a lot. Depends on filter density, what holder you're using, which slot, and whether there's bright light behind or to the side etc etc. Personally, I prefer screw-ins.
Click to expand...

I use Lee slot in....but discovered the hard way that you really need to cover the eye piece to prevent, i forget the technical name, but the band of light across the photograph :banghead:

Cheers.
 
Thanks again for all of you for taking the time to reply.
I am veering towards the 6 stop Firecrest at present, but I'll keep reading !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top