# Variable ND filter...



## Hardrock

Looking to get a ND filter and found these. Any thoughts if one of these is worth getting. And how do they affect image quality?


----------



## chaosrealm93

i think they add saturation to colors. usefull in really bright situations.


----------



## Hardrock

Ok sorry for the vague question. I understand how they work Im just curious if it would be better to have 2 or 3 different ND filters or is the variable ND filter just as good as a regular ND filter quality wise. Also how well does it hold up compared to the nonvariable?


----------



## table1349

If I was buying a variable ND filter it would be this one. Singh-Ray Filters: Vari-ND Variable Neutral Density Filter  I know and trust Singh-Ray's quality.


----------



## Hardrock

gryphonslair99 said:


> If I was buying a variable ND filter it would be this one. Singh-Ray Filters: Vari-ND Variable Neutral Density Filter I know and trust Singh-Ray's quality.


 
Thanks! How do you feel about the variable ND filter compared to a Normal ND.  I guess Im trying to compare them like primes vs zooms where there is give and take. Or am I totally off base ...


----------



## table1349

People that I have talked to with the Singh-Ray seem to like it.  I use standard 100mm X 100mm ND's since my graduated are 100mm X 150mm Singh-Ray's and I already have the holder.  I stack them as needed so I don't really see a reason that the circular wouldn't work just fine.


----------



## Markw

Is there any evidence that your super amazing, super expensive filters work better than the cheaper ones?  I mean, I'm sure they must to cost roughly 25x more, but I am legitimately curious if there is any series of photos somewhere that show this?

Mark


----------



## Garbz

Not sure about super expensive and super amazing filters, but there are many enough cases even just searching this very forum which gives examples of various filter brands.

In summary the law of diminishing returns applies. There is a big difference between a cheap and very nasty filter compared to a mid-grade Hoya multicoated filter, and there's a tiny difference between these Hoyas and expensive B+Ws and others.


----------



## usayit

Yup.. There's a difference between cheap filters and high quality ones.   Differences between two brands of high quality ones are difficult to distinguish.   Most here apparently prefer to go without filters.  I am the minority that prefers them... if you are like me, you might as well as get good quality.

Just a 2 cents..

1) Don't confuse ND filters with circular polarizers.  Two different things
2) Variable ND filters have two glass panes...   I'd rather not.   I would rather carry a couple ND filters (good quality) of different stops.
3) In a pinch, two circular polarizers back to back will behave similar to a variable ND filter.


----------



## Hardrock

usayit said:


> Yup.. There's a difference between cheap filters and high quality ones. Differences between two brands of high quality ones are difficult to distinguish. Most here apparently prefer to go without filters. I am the minority that prefers them... if you are like me, you might as well as get good quality.
> 
> Just a 2 cents..
> 
> 1) Don't confuse ND filters with circular polarizers. Two different things
> 2) Variable ND filters have two glass panes... I'd rather not. I would rather carry a couple ND filters (good quality) of different stops.
> 3) In a pinch, two circular polarizers back to back will behave similar to a variable ND filter.



Thanks!
No confusion for me between a ND and CP. I usually do not ever use filters... but I would like a decent quality ND filter to obtain longer exposures. I was looking to see if others have had good success with the  variable ND filters. I would rather make one purchase than multiple. I have already checked them out at a local camera shop but was really curious how they really performed in the real world and not from behind the counter.


----------



## usayit

Hardrock said:


> I would rather make one purchase than multiple.


 
Let's put things into perspective...

77mm Sighn-ray variable ND filter = $340 << NON_MULTI_COAT
77mm B+W (Most expensive) 3.0 filter = $184 << MULTI_COAT
77mm B+W (Second Most Expensive) 3.0 filter = $125.50 << SINGLE_COAT

Even cheaper are the ND filters that are not as dark as 3.0...  Lower end ND filters (single and non-coat) can be had for even cheaper for those still not convinced of higher quality filters.   My point, you can buy multiple equivalent quality filters for the price of the variable.  Hopefully, keeping it to a single filter most of the time with the option to stack when necessary.

Also, you need to evaluate whether or not you "really" need multiple levels of ND filters.  For slow exposure (waterfalls for example), most will shoot with a tripod so the difference between 1-3 stops is moot.. just carry the darker.   I carry two ND filters for different reasons; to shoot an f/1 lens wide open on a camera limited to 1/4000 of second... handheld in sunlight.  Even then, I'm usually using 1 of them most of the time.

Quality of filters is hard to determine from test shots inside / behind the store counter.


----------



## Hardrock

Quality of filters is hard to determine from test shots inside / behind the store counter.[/QUOTE]

Agreed! 

Thanks for input!


----------



## Garbz

usayit said:


> 1) Don't confuse ND filters with circular polarizers.  Two different things.


Yep but the difference between Variable ND filters and Polarisers are very small 



usayit said:


> 3) In a pinch, two circular polarizers back to back will behave similar to a variable ND filter.


Well two CPLs front to front would behave similar. Back to back would result in funny colours and an autofocus system that doesn't work 

But if you're really after a cheap way to do it and you already own a CPL then what you want is a LINEAR polariser. Stack that on top of the circular polariser and you're set, no need to worry about back to back or front to front threads not mating


----------



## STM

I too am in the minority I guess, because all of my lenses have Hoya MC UV(0) on them all the time. It is a whole lot cheaper to replace a filter than to have to replace the front element of a lens, especially since all my lenses are older AIS manual focus.  I have Hoya HMC 2x, 4x and 8x ND filters and use them all the time for portraiture outdoors. They enable me to use my fast Nikkors, 85mm f/1.4, 100mm f/1.8 and 180mm f/2.8 only a stop or two down to get very shallow depth of field. I spent about $70 for all three (they are 72mm diameter and came as a package deal), which is a heck of a lot less than a variable one which costs 4-5 times that.


----------



## STM

_"In a pinch, two circular polarizers back to back will behave similar to a variable ND filter."_

I would strongly recommend _*against*_ doing that. That is no fewer than _*EIGHT*_ air to glass surfaces, and if the CP are uncoated or single coated, you are setting yourself up for flare and or ghosts. Not to mention light loss and therefore an effective smaller maximum aperture. Not to mention that you will also get some weird color saturation and rendition.


----------



## Garbz

STM said:


> I would strongly recommend _*against*_ doing that. That is no fewer than _*EIGHT*_ air to glass surfaces, and if the CP are uncoated or single coated, you are setting yourself up for flare and or ghosts. Not to mention light loss and therefore an effective smaller maximum aperture. Not to mention that you will also get some weird color saturation and rendition.


 
Part of what creates additional flare relies on a change in angle of the light between refractive surfaces. For most filters this appears as two additional flares each on opposite sides of the light source. While you're right that a CPL filter has 4 air to glass interfaces, two of them are not field relevant due to how close together they are. You would see no additional flare as a result of this.

Stacking CPLs on the other hand would still double the amount of flare compared to a single one, but it's no where near as bad as your bold italic and capitalised word makes it out to be. 

May I also mention that light loss is the entire point of this exercise.


----------



## Segami21

Hi, we'll I have been using a vivitar vari nd filter 8 stops and what a piece of garbage. As soon as I start stopping it down past 3 stops I get an x across the image and it gets thicker as I stop down further.  And it is visible in the final image. The sighn ray filters are reported to be very nice I just picked up a blue/gold filter and its top notch





Hardrock said:


> Looking to get a ND filter and found these. Any thoughts if one of these is worth getting. And how do they affect image quality?


----------



## 480sparky

Segami21 said:


> Hi, we'll I have been using a vivitar vari nd filter 8 stops and what a piece of garbage. As soon as I start stopping it down past 3 stops I get an x across the image and it gets thicker as I stop down further.  And it is visible in the final image. The sighn ray filters are reported to be very nice I just picked up a blue/gold filter and its top notch
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hardrock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looking to get a ND filter and found these. Any thoughts if one of these is worth getting. And how do they affect image quality?
Click to expand...



Proof you get what you pay for.


----------



## jdoug

Segami21 said:


> Hi, we'll I have been using a vivitar vari nd filter 8 stops and what a piece of garbage.


I had been wondering about those Vivitar ones- thanks for posting.


----------

