# Lens filters



## rob_vrs (Jan 4, 2012)

Been looking at some filters, are they worth while?

Will they give better colour dependant on type?


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

What type of filters, for what purpose exactly. There are many different types and formats.


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

DW58 said:


> What type of filters, for what purpose exactly. There are many different types and formats.


As DW says, this is such a big area of photography... what type of photography do you do?


----------



## rob_vrs (Jan 4, 2012)

Amateur mainly a bit of automotive with landscape mainly, very amateur using a canon 1100d.


----------



## B2ONGO (May 5, 2011)

I'd say my best buy was a set of grad filters. My landscape photography improved a lot after I bought a set and learnt how to use them. 

I went for a mix of Hi-Tec and Cokin ones which I think are great. They are pretty cheap and do a decent job. You can buy more expensive ones like Lee etc but your talking a fair bit of wedge. 

A polarizer helps with reflections and bringing out colours but I wouldn't say I use it as much as the grads.

A ten stoppers great for a bit of fun with long exposures - see the long exposures thread above for examples of what can be achieved. 

Colour tinted filters I dont bother with, I find I can use Photoshop for any effect I'm looking for that might have been done with a coloured filter in the past.


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

rob_vrs said:


> Amateur mainly a bit of automotive with landscape mainly, very amateur using a canon 1100d.


Ah right. In that case regarding auto motive probably the main filter that would interest you would be a circular polariser. This can be used to saturate colours and intensify skies. Its other use which could help you is its ability to remove reflections and glare on glass etc. Heres a video showing it working...
The result is shown at 5mins 50 secs 





For landscape there are many types of filters but the main ones would be graduated filters. These help to get the correct exposure in both the foreground and sky. 
Heres a video to illustrate the advantages of them 





Shot with Graduated filters i took recently.

Blyth Jetty by Phil Whittaker (gizto29), on Flickr

Other filters you could consider are Extreme Neutral Density filters which can be used to give a surreal effect where you capture cloud movement or where you can make sea look milky and flat. Heres a few examples i took recently.

6 Stop ND filter... (Hoya ND64)

Whitburn Pre Dawn by Phil Whittaker (gizto29), on Flickr

10 stop Filter... (Hitech 10 Stop Pro)

Craster Harbour by Phil Whittaker (gizto29), on Flickr


Old Friends... by Phil Whittaker (gizto29), on Flickr

When using the 10 stop filters they are opaque and you cant see through them so you have to compose your shot then add the filter. Patience is required lol

Hope this helps, Phil


----------



## rob_vrs (Jan 4, 2012)

That is excellent information, muchly appreciated!!

I am currently away in USA and have just been in to a photography stored and looked at a UV filter and was after a circular polariser however they didn't have any. 

This seems a really stupid question, but The lenses I have are 58mm in diameter, is it a 58mm filter i need or is it a size to fit on the lens i.e. smaller or bigger?


----------



## pooma (Apr 12, 2008)

Buy the 58mm circular filter, if buying grads and big stoppers then the square type that go in a holder will serve you better if you plan on getting a variety of lenses anytime in the future.


----------



## rob_vrs (Jan 4, 2012)

pooma said:


> Buy the 58mm circular filter, if buying grads and big stoppers then the square type that go in a holder will serve you better if you plan on getting a variety of lenses anytime in the future.


Brilliant thankyou for that


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

pooma said:


> Buy the 58mm circular filter, if buying grads and big stoppers then the square type that go in a holder will serve you better if you plan on getting a variety of lenses anytime in the future.


CAn i add what i would class as something important here Rob. Ive been through this exact same procedure and spent a shedload on filters, plenty of which was replacing filters that were then no good as i upgraded lenses!

Buy 77mm filters and then buy step up rings which are only £2 on EBay. Heres a video which shows what im talking about. The reason i say this is at the minute you have a 58mm filter thread on your lens but say you fancied buying a new lens, for example a Sigma 10-20 Wide Angle Lens... then that lens has a 77mm thread and your filters are now useless with that lens as theyre too small. 
You would now have to buy a filter for that lens whereas if you buy 77mm now you can just buy a 58-77mm step up ring for £2 hence meaning the filter would go straight on teh new lens and you can still use it on the original lens with the smaller thread. I spent £60 on a Marumi Circular Polariser, £70 on a Heliopan 10 Stop filter and both are no good to me now as they are 67mm and my newer lenses are 77mm. 
Luckily ive sold the 10 stop (but had to replace it so lost money there) then ive still got the Marumi Circ Polariser gathering dust and its brand new.

Other than that i bought a full set of 9 Hitech square filters but the smaller size of 85mm which slot into a holder. However when i bought my wide lens they were too small so i had to rebuy 100mm wide square filters. If only i knew all of this at the beginning i wouldve saved a fortune!






Phil


----------



## B2ONGO (May 5, 2011)

GIZTO29 said:


> If only i knew all of this at the beginning i wouldve saved a fortune!


Good advice!!


----------



## pooma (Apr 12, 2008)

GIZTO29 said:


> CAn i add what i would class as something important here Rob. Ive been through this exact same procedure and spent a shedload on filters, plenty of which was replacing filters that were then no good as i upgraded lenses!
> 
> Buy 77mm filters and then buy step up rings which are only £2 on EBay. Heres a video which shows what im talking about. The reason i say this is at the minute you have a 58mm filter thread on your lens but say you fancied buying a new lens, for example a Sigma 10-20 Wide Angle Lens... then that lens has a 77mm thread and your filters are now useless with that lens as theyre too small.
> You would now have to buy a filter for that lens whereas if you buy 77mm now you can just buy a 58-77mm step up ring for £2 hence meaning the filter would go straight on teh new lens and you can still use it on the original lens with the smaller thread. I spent £60 on a Marumi Circular Polariser, £70 on a Heliopan 10 Stop filter and both are no good to me now as they are 67mm and my newer lenses are 77mm.
> ...


There you go, I stand corrected and am happy to do so as I learn something new everyday as they say. I've not had the funds to delve into filters really and this bit of advise should save me a few quid when I do.


----------



## rob_vrs (Jan 4, 2012)

That is absolutely brilliant advice, couldn't ask for better, thank you very much, i am actually considering a 10-20 or 10-22 lens next so will be taking your advice


----------



## Pezza4u (Jun 7, 2007)

Some very good info in this thread, I still haven't bought any filters yet! I don't really wanna spend that much but have £40 of Jessops vouchers to use. The 77mm Hoya CP filter is £18 more than the 52mm one though, so not sure what to get as I wasn't really planning on getting more lenses.

Is there any reason why you say buy 77mm filters Phil, as you can get sizes bigger than that, although they are very expensive so that might be why?


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

Do you really need all of these filters? I went through phases of using grads, tints etc. in the past, but these days prefer to use only an occasional polarizer and do anything else I need in post processing.

It's all a matter of taste, but I'm not keen on landscapes with unnatural skies etc. owing to use of grads, or an exaggerated under-exposed look etc.

I guess it's all down to taste.


----------



## rob_vrs (Jan 4, 2012)

Think I'm going to start with a circular polarizer to hopefully give better colouring and if i fancy some grad filters give them a go but will see, on a shopping spree while I'm in usa haha


----------



## Pezza4u (Jun 7, 2007)

DW58 said:


> Do you really need all of these filters? I went through phases of using grads, tints etc. in the past, but these days prefer to use only an occasional polarizer and do anything else I need in post processing.
> 
> It's all a matter of taste, but I'm not keen on landscapes with unnatural skies etc. owing to use of grads, or an exaggerated under-exposed look etc.
> 
> I guess it's all down to taste.


Can you get the ND effect using PP though? That's the main filter I'm after so I can blur water and clouds.


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Pezza, the majority of wide angle and bigger lenses are 77mm and i can only think of 1, the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 which is bigger with an 82mm filter thread. 
If you watch the vid i linked last the lady explains 

I was gonna say guys you can use post processing to get some of these effects such as digital graduated filters but you cannot replicate a Circular Polariser and certainly not the effect that a 10 stop filter gives. Well maybe someone will correct me but youde have to be pretty bloody amazing in Photoshop. 
As i said Pezza it may be more but it'll be alot cheaper in the long run... however if you are happy with the lens you have then just go for the size of the current lens  You dont have to buy Hoya if you dont and could maybe look at a brand like Kood or Haida who make decent filteres at reasonable prices 
Circ Polarisers
http://www.premier-ink.co.uk/photographic/threaded-filters/circular-polarising/-c-60_365_370.html

ND Filters
http://www.premier-ink.co.uk/photographic/threaded-filters/neutral-density/-c-60_365_371.html

I have friends who do seascape and they only own screw in filters and add digital grads in Lightroom or use a technique called blending where you make different adjustments to parts of an image then blend them together but this isnt for someone who doesnt feel the need to spend hours on PhotoShop editing.

DW58, surely its better to get things right in camera first? Without grads i find that sometimes if i was shooting a sunrise for example i would just end up with shots that were scrap as the sky would be totally blown out such is the exposure difference between the land and sky.

Each to their own though 

Phil


----------



## Pezza4u (Jun 7, 2007)

Phil, I didn't watch the video as I was at work, will try and see it when I get home.

I haven't really got into photography like you have so don't think the filters would get much use. The only other lens I may possibly get is a wide angle but that won't be for a good while yet.

I had been looking at the square filters and buying an adapter for them but the screw on ones look tidier.

Another thing I'm confused with is how do you know what ND filters to get, i.e. ND2, ND4, ND8 etc?


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

Pezza4u said:


> Another thing I'm confused with is how do you know what ND filters to get, i.e. ND2, ND4, ND8 etc?


All depends on what/when you want to take photo's of using it.

Are you shooting in daylight and just want to blur some water a little, in which case you might get away with just an ND2 (maybe you "only" need/want a shutter speed of up to a couple of seconds).

or do you want to do a long shutter in broad daylight and/or get the full on "mist" effect of water in which case you'll be looking towards ND10 levels (to allow you exposure times of 30-60 seconds in in daylight)

I'd say start with something like an ND2 or ND4. Because it's easier to compensate with other settings to gain a longer shutter speed (change aperture, drop ISO, -EV) and experiment, whereas if you plumb for an ND8/10 straight away you are pretty much stuck with very long exposures to get enough light through it.

EDIT:
This site isn't bad for a quick read either http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/neutral-density-filters.htm

And here's a little exposure table.
Left Column is shutter speed you might use with no filter. Then filtered equivalent as you move right


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

GIZTO29 said:


> DW58, surely its better to get things right in camera first? Without grads i find that sometimes if i was shooting a sunrise for example i would just end up with shots that were scrap as the sky would be totally blown out such is the exposure difference between the land and sky.
> 
> Each to their own though
> 
> Phil


You can add a graduated tint in PhotoShop afterwards, but if you add it with a filter, you can't easily take it away. I have a full set of grads - I stopped using them years ago because I don't like the unatural effects they give to landscapes in my opinion

Caveat - you can always tweak an image later, but there are things you can't take away.


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

I agree with Phil and will go so far as to say its impossible to do it in pp with high contrast sunset shots. When I shoot into the sun(set) I often have up to 6 stops worth of Graduated ND filters strapped to the front of my lens.

This is impossible to recreate from a raw file where typically image quality degrades after pushing/pulling 1-1.5 stops. 

My own landscape photography has improved exponentially(sp) after using grads. 

The only PP option is to HDR and I mean for exposure blending rather than creating a horrible effect often associated with HDR. This is perfectly acceptable too in my book.


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

DW58 said:


> You can add a graduated tint in PhotoShop afterwards, but if you add it with a filter, you can't easily take it away. I have a full set of grads - I stopped using them years ago because I don't like the unatural effects they give to landscapes in my opinion
> 
> Caveat - you can always tweak an image later, but there are things you can't take away.


But if you think you get an unnatural effect from a physical grad how can a digital one be any better? I myself use grads sometimes in Lightroom or Adobe Camera Raw but i find that they are uneven towards the top (ie they get far too dark at the top edge). Maybe im doing something wrong. 
I also find by using grads the camera meters better. One of the best grads i have is a Hitech reverse grad where it starts dark in the centre and fades to the top edge. This is brilliant for sunrise where the brightest section is the horizon.
I honestly dont think Pezza is wanting to be getting into the processing side to the degree of adding grads etc in Photoshop etc.



Brazo said:


> I agree with Phil and will go so far as to say its impossible to do it in pp with high contrast sunset shots. When I shoot into the sun(set) I often have up to 6 stops worth of Graduated ND filters strapped to the front of my lens.
> 
> This is impossible to recreate from a raw file where typically image quality degrades after pushing/pulling 1-1.5 stops.
> 
> ...


I agree with you here Brazo, the stop difference can be huge at sunset/rise.



Pezza4u said:


> Phil, I didn't watch the video as I was at work, will try and see it when I get home.
> 
> I haven't really got into photography like you have so don't think the filters would get much use. The only other lens I may possibly get is a wide angle but that won't be for a good while yet.
> 
> ...


Thats a fair point Pezz but the main part was aimed at the OP who wants to buy filters  As i mentioned in my last post you may be better going for a cheaper brand such as Haida or Kood.. i know some cracking photographers who have the Kood ND4 in their bags and its only £18 for the 100mm square filter (which we use in the lee Holder)

Re the filter choices it all depends on the reason for wanting them. If i read right you want them to capture water movement blurring it. In that case you would be looking at m1pui's advice and going for an ND4 (2 stop) or i would say an ND8 (3 stop) filter. Its pretty confusing as those 2 are also known as 0.6 and 0.9 respectively :/ 
It means they slow down the shutter by 2 stop or 3 stop. For example if you had the camera metered and it said 1 second then a 2 stop filter would change the shutter speed to 4 seconds. You just double the exposure 2 times (1-2 then 2-4). With a 3 stop it would go from 1-8 seconds. 1-2, 2-4, 4-8.

This is why people use a 10 Stop filter for getting big cloud movement or for making water look like deadpan flat milk. If you had a 1/100 exposure reading then put on a 10 stop you would double 10 times and end up with a 10 second exposure.

Heres an example..
In this shot which is 0.5 seconds there is some nice water movement. I used a 3 stop Grad and 2 Stop Grad stacked together but with the dark part of the 3 stop pulled right down so only the dark part was over the lens so it acted like a solid ND filter.

S.. The photograph formerly known as Swirl by Phil Whittaker (gizto29), on Flickr

This one is from ages ago where i used a cheap 2 Stop filter from Ebay and it is a 1 second exposure, which i think is about perfect for capturing a bit of wooshery 

Untitled by Phil Whittaker (gizto29), on Flickr

This one is maybe 2-3 seconds and i used a 2 Stop Kood ND and a 2 stop Grad.

Strictly by Phil Whittaker (gizto29), on Flickr

You could just go on Ebay and get a cheap set of 3 ND filters for about £10 where you get a 1, 2 & 3 stop screw type. Thats what i had originally and i wouldve posted them to you had i not gave them away a few weeks ago lol.

There are pros and cons with both types of filters. With square filters they are easier to use and you can use grads but you have to buy the kit to slot them into. With screw types you only have to buy the filter but you dont have the advantage of using a grad with them so can struggle with the varying exposure between land and sky. This would take you back to processing.... I have both types and use them both 

Phil


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

GIZTO29 said:


> But if you think you get an unnatural effect from a physical grad how can a digital one be any better? I myself use grads sometimes in Lightroom or Adobe Camera Raw but i find that they are uneven towards the top (ie they get far too dark at the top edge). Maybe im doing something wrong.
> I also find by using grads the camera meters better. One of the best grads i have is a Hitech reverse grad where it starts dark in the centre and fades to the top edge. This is brilliant for sunrise where the brightest section is the horizon.
> I honestly dont think Pezza is wanting to be getting into the processing side to the degree of adding grads etc in Photoshop etc.
> 
> Phil


I think you can get an unnatural effect from the use of any artificial modification whether at the time or post processing. I first used grad filters in 1979 - they were all the rage then and it was difficult to find a landscape not ruined by them.

My point is that if you use grad filters with your landscapes you're stuck with them - perhaps images from a long and expensive journey that you can really change later.

After years of using such artificial aids, I chose long ago to abandon them.

Obviously the choice is yours - a choice I won't try to influence, I just wanted to make an observation which I have now done. Maybe in thorty years you'll understand why I made the decision I did, maybe you won't.


----------



## Blueberry (Aug 10, 2007)

I will add my thought for what they are worth.

As a photographer, I would try to get things right in camera rather than spend hours sitting in front of a computer trying to recreate something that I didn't capture at the time. You do need at last 6 stops of grads to keep all detail when shooting at sunset or sunrise for that matter. Post processing will not recreate the same effects as using grads on the camera.

I started off with Kood filters but have now got Lee Filters. I much prefer square filters as I find it gives you greater flexibility and you can combine with a polarising filter, if required or 10 stop with a grad filter.

As a photographer, I think grads are a must


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Blueberry said:


> I will add my thought for what they are worth.
> 
> As a photographer, I would try to get things right in camera rather than spend hours sitting in front of a computer trying to recreate something that I didn't capture at the time. You do need at last 6 stops of grads to keep all detail when shooting at sunset or sunrise for that matter. Post processing will not recreate the same effects as using grads on the camera.
> 
> ...


Hey Blueberry, i also have the Lee Foundation Kit and various square filters from Hitech, Lee & Kood. CAn i ask, which polariser do you have? I and a few friends were discussing it the other day and i mentioned the Heliopan which seems very popular. I have had a Heliopan 10 stop in the past which was brilliant  For the record i do have a few screw in filters aswell, namely the Hoya NDX400 (8ish stops) and ND64 (6 Stop). The 6 stop is great as i put it on before the Lee Holder. You can get some great long exposures and the good thing is you can see through it so can compose first without removing etc 

Phil


----------



## Blueberry (Aug 10, 2007)

GIZTO29 said:


> Hey Blueberry, i also have the Lee Foundation Kit and various square filters from Hitech, Lee & Kood. CAn i ask, which polariser do you have? I and a few friends were discussing it the other day and i mentioned the Heliopan which seems very popular. I have had a Heliopan 10 stop in the past which was brilliant  For the record i do have a few screw in filters aswell, namely the Hoya NDX400 (8ish stops) and ND64 (6 Stop). The 6 stop is great as i put it on before the Lee Holder. You can get some great long exposures and the good thing is you can see through it so can compose first without removing etc
> 
> Phil


Hi Phil

I have the Lee Polarising Filter too. It's quite expensive but an excellent piece of kit.

I got a screw in 10 stop filter first off from B&W. The trouble is you obviously can't see a thing through it so you have to compose first, then screw it on, but you run the risk of moving your focus etc whilst screwing it on. I also found it very time consuming so I then bought a Hitech 10 stop square filter as I couldn't get a Lee Big Stopper for love nor money. I find this much better to use and I can use other filters at the same time. I haven't used my 10 stop filter for quite some time, mainly because I lost my photographic mojo but it's coming back now. I'm on holiday in a weeks time so I plan on getting out and about and fettling up my camera, filters and tripod


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Blueberry said:


> Hi Phil
> 
> I have the Lee Polarising Filter too. It's quite expensive but an excellent piece of kit.
> 
> I got a screw in 10 stop filter first off from B&W. The trouble is you obviously can't see a thing through it so you have to compose first, then screw it on, but you run the risk of moving your focus etc whilst screwing it on. I also found it very time consuming so I then bought a Hitech 10 stop square filter as I couldn't get a Lee Big Stopper for love nor money. I find this much better to use and I can use other filters at the same time. I haven't used my 10 stop filter for quite some time, mainly because I lost my photographic mojo but it's coming back now. I'm on holiday in a weeks time so I plan on getting out and about and fettling up my camera, filters and tripod


Cool, i have the Hitech 10 Stop Pro also and came across the same Big Stopper issue! :[ HAve you seen the youtube vid of the Lee Factory? No wonder theyre always out of stock :/ lol


----------



## Blueberry (Aug 10, 2007)

No I've not seen that video. I shall have a look tonight.


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

DW58 said:


> I think you can get an unnatural effect from the use of any artificial modification whether at the time or post processing. I first used grad filters in 1979 - they were all the rage then and it was difficult to find a landscape not ruined by them.
> 
> My point is that if you use grad filters with your landscapes you're stuck with them - perhaps images from a long and expensive journey that you can really change later.
> 
> ...


I would say shooting without grads produces an artificial look as you get perfectly exposed foreground and a 'white' sky or a dramatic sky with a thick 'black' border at the bottom!

This is not how the eye sees it.

The 'dynamic range' of your eyes is superior to that of camera so by adding a grad to 'balance' the exposure you are getting a more natural looking photograph as its 'much' closer to what your eyes would see.

I would agree that using a 10 stop filter can produce surreal or even 'artifical' images but if all you want to do is 'catalogue' a scene as your camera sees it buy a point and shoot and be done with it!


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Blueberry said:


> No I've not seen that video. I shall have a look tonight.







Phil


----------



## Blueberry (Aug 10, 2007)

GIZTO29 said:


> Phil


Thanks for that Phil. No wonder there's such a backlog of orders for the Big Stopper. It's a very time consuming process.


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Blueberry said:


> Thanks for that Phil. No wonder there's such a backlog of orders for the Big Stopper. It's a very time consuming process.


I cant believe they dont expand though :/

Pezza, heres a cheap alternative you could try...

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/58MM-Neut...900&pid=100009&prg=1013&rk=4&sd=251156421003&

Phil


----------



## wayne_w (Jan 25, 2007)

I've used these guys before, very good service & cost effective products :thumb:

http://www.srb-griturn.com

HTH
Wayne


----------



## rob_vrs (Jan 4, 2012)

Just bought some cheap 58mm for my last day over here $20 for a uv and a circular polarizer so will see how i get on tomorrow with them


----------

