Variable or multiple fixed ND filters?

[Colin Southern]

Read it again carefully.

I've read it several times now, but I'm still not sure if the last part of the 1st sentence is a question or a statement.

[novetan]

Dear all,

This my 1st post.

I stumbled onto this thread as i was researching abt variable ND filters. Its such an amazing site. I also read almost every articles abt Cole Thompson which i hv unheard off. Awesome.

Ok, back to topic.

One of the readers in Dave’s video commented Tiffen variable ND is just ND whereas Singh Ray variable Nd has polarization (however SR have vignetting issue, but that’s another story)

After watching Dave video, I’m lean towards Tiffen and in order to carry less gear, I also wanted a variable ND to act as a polarizer (by turning the screw ring that mount against the lens-I know has to be careful as it may drop).

I’d hv thought all variable filters are somehow consist of polarizer?

Can someone advise pls.

[Manfred M]

Dear all,

This my 1st post.

I stumbled onto this thread as i was researching abt variable ND filters. Its such an amazing site. I also read almost every articles abt Cole Thompson which i hv unheard off. Awesome.

Ok, back to topic.

One of the readers in Dave’s video commented Tiffen variable ND is just ND whereas Singh Ray variable Nd has polarization (however SR have vignetting issue, but that’s another story)

After watching Dave video, I’m lean towards Tiffen and in order to carry less gear, I also wanted a variable ND to act as a polarizer (by turning the screw ring that mount against the lens-I know has to be careful as it may drop).

I’d hv thought all variable filters are somehow consist of polarizer?

Can someone advise pls.

Hi Novetan - Welcome to CiC. Would you mind completing your profile; name and where you are from. We are a pretty informal group here and tend to go on a first-name basis. Just click on the "My Profile" tab on the top of the page and go from there.

Unfortunately, the site's variable ND filter guru (Colin Southern) has left the CiC family and is no longer available to comment. I do know that Donald MacKenzie, another site moderator, bought one on Colin's recommendations and made some very positive comments, based on his experiences with it.

Right now I shoot with solid ND filters; I have several Lee filters as well as a B+W and a Tiffen. Quite frankly, Tiffen are a lower middle-end supplier and I would probably avoid them if I could, if for no other reason than the aluminum mounts that they use. I have read a number of negative comments about their variable ND filters; I'd be suspicious because their units are so much less expensive than the competition's.

Another manufacturer that might be worth considering is Heliopan. Philip Bloom, who is probably the most important "guru" in the video world considers it to be the best variable ND he has ever used, and while not inexpensive, it is less money than the SinghRay. I own a few Heliopan filters and can confirm impeccible optical and build quality. They use brass hardware in their filters, which is a far better material than aluminum.

http://philipbloom.net/2011/06/04/th...r-i-have-used/


As for needing a polarizing filter as the basis for an variable ND, I don't think so as there are other (albeit more expensive) approaches for building a variable ND. If you look at the SinghRay site, they offer both polarizing ones and ones that do not have this feature. I seem to remember reading that Tiffen uses this approach and is one of the reasons for some of the negative reviews; unfortunately, I can't find the source of this information right now.

[JR1]

Grumpy driver is right, horses for courses in fact

I use single filters, though they are more cumbersome, i use the Lee system on my 14-24 and others, and before that Cokin

[novetan]

Unfortunately, the site's variable ND filter guru (Colin Southern) has left the CiC family and is no longer available to comment. I do know that Donald MacKenzie, another site moderator, bought one on Colin's recommendations and made some very positive comments, based on his experiences with it.

Right now I shoot with solid ND filters; I have several Lee filters as well as a B+W and a Tiffen. Quite frankly, Tiffen are a lower middle-end supplier and I would probably avoid them if I could, if for no other reason than the aluminum mounts that they use. I have read a number of negative comments about their variable ND filters; I'd be suspicious because their units are so much less expensive than the competition's.

Another manufacturer that might be worth considering is Heliopan. Philip Bloom, who is probably the most important "guru" in the video world considers it to be the best variable ND he has ever used, and while not inexpensive, it is less money than the SinghRay. I own a few Heliopan filters and can confirm impeccible optical and build quality. They use brass hardware in their filters, which is a far better material than aluminum.

http://philipbloom.net/2011/06/04/th...r-i-have-used/


As for needing a polarizing filter as the basis for an variable ND, I don't think so as there are other (albeit more expensive) approaches for building a variable ND. If you look at the SinghRay site, they offer both polarizing ones and ones that do not have this feature. I seem to remember reading that Tiffen uses this approach and is one of the reasons for some of the negative reviews; unfortunately, I can't find the source of this information right now.

Tks Manfred

Actually last 2 days I've read so much. Sad to say sometimes the more we read, the more confusion it becomes as not everyone has the same opinion despite creditable video test it may seems.

I hv ruled Tiffen out as I just realised the outer ring dia is 70.1mm. Its a strange no and I can't add on any other filterif needed be.

Heliopan is out for me as it gives limited stop range. I'm considering up to 8 stops. Both Heliopan and Singh ray is too ex. I'm not a professional and don't need the most perfect lens. So it leaves me with Genus Eclipse which i believe is a decent variable ND lens. I also read good review abt it.

Question - can i use this as a polarizer? Anyone has any experience with it?

Tks.

[Manfred M]

Tks Manfred

Actually last 2 days I've read so much. Sad to say sometimes the more we read, the more confusion it becomes as not everyone has the same opinion despite creditable video test it may seems.

I hv ruled Tiffen out as I just realised the outer ring dia is 70.1mm. Its a strange no and I can't add on any other filterif needed be.

Heliopan is out for me as it gives limited stop range. I'm considering up to 8 stops. Both Heliopan and Singh ray is too ex. I'm not a professional and don't need the most perfect lens. So it leaves me with Genus Eclipse which i believe is a decent variable ND lens. I also read good review abt it.

Question - can i use this as a polarizer? Anyone has any experience with it?

Tks.

David - It's a variable ND filter, not a polarizer, so the construction would be different. If you need a polarizer, then buy one. It will give you 1-1/2 or 2 stops of light reduction as well.

Second comment - adding a second filter? A word of warning, stacked filters can be very difficult to get apart, especially in a design like the variable ND or polarizer. Trying to mount / dismount a filter on a moveable ring is challanging to say the least (personal experience coming in here). If you are planning to do this, you might want to invest in a set of filter wrenches to get the darn things apart. Aluminum mounts are definitely more troublesome than brass ones. but I also had trouble getting two brass filters apart once.

I would suggest that the stop range is an interesting point. Generally for certain types of work, those where I want to have a shallower DoF (i.e. normal shutter speeds), but wider open aperture, I rarely find I go beyond 3 stops. If I want funky water effects, 5 or more likely 10 stops will be required, depending on the ambent light. Which of the two are you trying to do?

Once you understand the type of shooting you are planning to do, the other features will help narrow down your choices. If I were in the market for one of these, the Heliopan that has solid stops would be of interest to me because of the precise stop adjustment it has.

I know Genus from the video side, but don't own any of their gear. I had not realized that they were into filters now.

[novetan]

David - It's a variable ND filter, not a polarizer, so the construction would be different. If you need a polarizer, then buy one. It will give you 1-1/2 or 2 stops of light reduction as well.

Second comment - adding a second filter? A word of warning, stacked filters can be very difficult to get apart, especially in a design like the variable ND or polarizer. Trying to mount / dismount a filter on a moveable ring is challanging to say the least (personal experience coming in here). If you are planning to do this, you might want to invest in a set of filter wrenches to get the darn things apart. Aluminum mounts are definitely more troublesome than brass ones. but I also had trouble getting two brass filters apart once.

I would suggest that the stop range is an interesting point. Generally for certain types of work, those where I want to have a shallower DoF (i.e. normal shutter speeds), but wider open aperture, I rarely find I go beyond 3 stops. If I want funky water effects, 5 or more likely 10 stops will be required, depending on the ambent light. Which of the two are you trying to do?

Once you understand the type of shooting you are planning to do, the other features will help narrow down your choices. If I were in the market for one of these, the Heliopan that has solid stops would be of interest to me because of the precise stop adjustment it has.

I know Genus from the video side, but don't own any of their gear. I had not realized that they were into filters now.

Tls Manfred for comments.

I already have a Hoya 3 and 9 stops, stacked up and gives me 12! I do have a separate polariser.

I know exactly what you mean abt difficult getting it unscrewed when stacked cause i hv my fair share of bad experiences. Therefore I seldom screw all the way in when stacked

As day passed, I just wanted to carry less accessories and gears with a little compromise on quality, with a 3 in 1 lens thing with a polarizer thrown into the mixed, if possible. May sound optimistic. Lol. I’m not a pro and don’t earn a living fr photography, hence I don’t need the best equip., though I still strive for a well compose image as far as I can.

I have been reading more articles the last 4 hrs and realised i may run the risk of having the "X" shading on the image no matter how good the quality of these variable ND are. I wouldn't want to waste 3 to 5 mins (sometimes add another few mins for in-camera denoising) and ended with an usable image. It could be a pain in the a**. I have not thrown out the idea of a variable ND yet. I’m still reading, and asking.

For your interest, these are some of my long exposure shots.

http://david-low.smugmug.com/Other/A...3724&k=jHZJsHV

[Manfred M]

Tls Manfred for comments.

I already have a Hoya 3 and 9 stops, stacked up and gives me 12! I do have a separate polariser.

I know exactly what you mean abt difficult getting it unscrewed when stacked cause i hv my fair share of bad experiences. Therefore I seldom screw all the way in when stacked

As day passed, I just wanted to carry less accessories and gears with a little compromise on quality, with a 3 in 1 lens thing with a polarizer thrown into the mixed, if possible. May sound optimistic. Lol. I’m not a pro and don’t earn a living fr photography, hence I don’t need the best equip., though I still strive for a well compose image as far as I can.

I have been reading more articles the last 4 hrs and realised i may run the risk of having the "X" shading on the image no matter how good the quality of these variable ND are. I wouldn't want to waste 3 to 5 mins (sometimes add another few mins for in-camera denoising) and ended with an usable image. It could be a pain in the a**. I have not thrown out the idea of a variable ND yet. I’m still reading, and asking.

For your interest, these are some of my long exposure shots.

http://david-low.smugmug.com/Other/A...3724&k=jHZJsHV

Hi David - the issue I have when responding to responses from someone who is new to the CiC community is trying to figure out what knowledge and experience they have. Trying to craft a response is difficult, as new members can be either complete novices, well established and knowledgable photographers and anything in between.

Now that I've seen your work (quite nice, may I add) and a list of the gear that you already have, I have a better understanding of your needs. The issue with filters is that they are part of the optical path, and from a quality standpoint, you want to put something infront of your lens that is at least in the same class as the rest of your equipment.

Your Smugmug files that I had a look at seem to be shot with a GH1 with the Lumix 14-140mm lens. I have a GX7 and use the same lens. Definitely a decent mid-range camera (if you are still shooting with it); age wise it's about the same age as my Nikon D90, so a bit older, but still a decent performer. I had mentioned I have some Tiffen filters; I use them on this lens for the same reason you don't want to go to high end filters. I wouldn't get too concerned about fit and Tiffen filters. They are made in the USA on likely machines that are built on the Imperial rather than metric system. This means the output will be "soft" metric, i.e. dimemsons will be "close enough" to work.

Finally, only you can decide if something is "good enough" for your needs.

[novetan]

Hi David - the issue I have when responding to responses from someone who is new to the CiC community is trying to figure out what knowledge and experience they have. Trying to craft a response is difficult, as new members can be either complete novices, well established and knowledgable photographers and anything in between.

Now that I've seen your work (quite nice, may I add) and a list of the gear that you already have, I have a better understanding of your needs. The issue with filters is that they are part of the optical path, and from a quality standpoint, you want to put something infront of your lens that is at least in the same class as the rest of your equipment.

Your Smugmug files that I had a look at seem to be shot with a GH1 with the Lumix 14-140mm lens. I have a GX7 and use the same lens. Definitely a decent mid-range camera (if you are still shooting with it); age wise it's about the same age as my Nikon D90, so a bit older, but still a decent performer. I had mentioned I have some Tiffen filters; I use them on this lens for the same reason you don't want to go to high end filters. I wouldn't get too concerned about fit and Tiffen filters. They are made in the USA on likely machines that are built on the Imperial rather than metric system. This means the output will be "soft" metric, i.e. dimemsons will be "close enough" to work.

Finally, only you can decide if something is "good enough" for your needs.

Hi Manfred,

Tks for your compliments.

You are spot on. I’m a one-camera man with 14-140mm lens. I just don’t like to lug ard so many diff gears. Anything wider than 28mm, I’ll use my P&S which gives me 24mm. Lately I hv purchased a GH-4 and will still be using the old lens. Basically that is it.

I think I’m now more informed, tks to your contribution, this forum and my reading up last 2 days.

I will take time to read this forum as it seems there are certain things I can pick up.

Cheers, and merry X’mas.

[leheiner]

I've got the thin version and use it on a Tokina 11-16 ultra wide angle mounted on a Canon 40D with its 1.6 crop sensor (and on top of a UV filter). And, yes, at 11 and 12mm there is vignetting.

Problem? None. Compose your photograph so that you can crop what you don't want, out.

[leheiner]

Move the vignetting lever to the right instead of to the left to add artistic vignetting in light room.