Graduated ND filter quandry

I've read over the archives concerning graduated ND filters and I'm

now in a quandry. I take my photo work seriously, (I'm hoping to do

enough nature work to supplement my real profession, writing) and I

need to add graduated ND filters to my bag. The problem is my budget.

 

My original plan was to purchase the Cokin "P" mount, plus a set of 1

and 2 stop Cokin graduated ND filters, knowing they are not "true" ND

filters. A total cash outlay of $65.00 US. But now I'm alarmed by

what I've read. Exactly how bad is the color shift brought on by

these filters? (I shoot Velvia or Provia 90% of the time; Kodachrome

makes up the difference.) Are Cokin filters so bad, that if they are

my only option, I should do without?

 

The truth is, I can't afford the Singh-Ray filters without

significant budgeting changes. At $99.00 US plus shipping, I can

swing one; two would be a strain. Are they worth it? And if I do

spring for Singh-Ray, which one (or two) should I buy? I shoot mostly

in the southeastern US, but I will be working in South Dakota and

Wyoming this June/July on assignment.

 

Thanks!

Arguably, the .3 (3 stop) "soft edge" is the most useful, the .2 (2 stop) "soft edge" second. You can save about $30 per filter by buying the rectangular Tiffen Grad NDs -- but, if you try to use them with extreme wide-angle lenses (=17mm); you may find their slightly shorter length (vs. the Singh Rays') to be limiting (if you try to place the graduated area anywhere other then the center of the image). Another advantage of the Tiffens, they are made of glass (and not prone to scratching like Singh Ray's, but will also break if dropped). Advantage of Singh Rays'; -- and why they are arguably worth the extra cost and constant vigilance (against scratches) -- is their extra 20mm length, which, with a 17mm lens, allows positioning anywhere in the image.

 

Arguably, one would want to have both the .2 and .3 filters in their kit -- because sometimes you may want to stack them as sometimes 3 stops is not enough (a typical mountain landscape with a high peak illuminated by the late afternoon light, and the foreground in shadow, will require about 5 stops of filtration).

 

Also, Tiffen does not offer the hard edge Grad ND filters - where Singh Ray does.

The hard edge Grad NDs are also useful, though somewhat less so -- being specially applicable to landscape images incorporating flat horizons (such as to seascapes and prairies).

 

IMHO

I can't speak for the Cokins, but seems photo.netters almost universally regard them as cheap substitutes for the real thing. Their catalogues/example photos/website don't imbibe me with any confidence, I might add.

 

I bought a couple of Hitech GND filters based on the good opinions of many on photo.net. Imagine my dismay when, the first time I used them, the slides came back with a magenta cast. They look *ok*, the cast is not obvious to everyone, but it's there and annoys me. Upon more careful examination it's pretty obvious that the filters have a cast.

 

The Australian dollar is still falling. I'm waiting for it to rise a little before I order some Singh-Rays...

I use Sinar (equivalent to Hitech and Lee) optical resin filters. My

most heavily used graduated neutral density filter is the N.D.

O.60N.D.. This is equivalent to the soft edge ND grads of the

other lines (Sinar didn't offer a hard edged grad). Far away I use

it more than the 0.90ND (3 stop grad) or much more than the the

0.30ND grad. I shoot mainly Velvia and Provia 100F. The soft

edge filters are more versatile and more natural appearing on

film than the hard edged filters unless you shoot a lot in places

that have a very clean horizon line.

I have been through both Tiffen and now Singh-Ray Graduated ND filters. There is definitely a difference, but much depends on what your end usage will be. If you are trying to have images published with higher quality publications such as Sierra Club Books, and Audubon ...the color shift will make a difference. If you are going to enter the images in competitions or contests it won't make any difference at the local photo club, but will definitely make a difference in competitions such as the BBC's Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition. I carry the 2 stop and 3 stop soft step, and was wishing that I had the 2 & 3 stop hard step this past fall when I was in the Canadian Arctic for the first time. Hope this helps. (My publication acceptance rate has gone up since I switched to Singh-Ray ... that being said I would like to think it is because I have gotten better as a photographer as opposed to the filter change being solely responsible for the publications.)

I have both Tiffen and Singh-Ray ND filters. The Tiffen filters show noticeable contrast reduction and slight optical distortions when viewing prints 11x14 or larger. It is barely perceptable at 11x14, more so at 16x20 and even greater at 20x30. These are prints made from 6x9 negatives or transparencies. At 8x10 the only difference you can see is a slight non neutral tint to the images. The exact nature of the tint depends on the lighting conditions, but it is there.

 

The homepage image at http://wyofoto.com was taken with a Singh Ray 2 stop ND filter.

 

The above comments are for normal or wide angle lenses. Telephoto lenses magnify the distortions and worsen them.

Singh-Ray all the way if want to make that leap you're talking about - remeber the old addage - you get what you pay for! Look at it this way - the difference in price is a dinner at the local pub/restaurant (w/o much to drink of course)

Singh-Ray filters are very good. They are made from optical resin. 2 stop (0.6 ND) and 3 stop (0.9 ND) filters are the most useful. There is third type: reverse ND. You can check Singh-Ray web-page. The soft edge filter is easier to blend and hard edge filter is more suitable for horizon. If you can have only two:

2 stop ND w/Soft edge and

3 stop Reverse ND (or ND w/Hard edge) will be a good combination.

Ok!!!

 

I'm going with the Singh-Ray filters - you've all convinced me!

 

I'm planning to order one 2 stop soft edge and one 3 stop soft edge. I'll look at the hard edged filters later - depending on the success of my trip.

 

Thanks to all who responded - I really do appreciate it!

It is somewhat hard to describe it in words, but keep in mind that the Singh-Ray 2-stop soft filter is indeed quite "soft." Half of the filter is clear. The transition from clear to 2-stop dark happens very gradually across about 25% to 30% of the width of the filter. In other words, the remaining 20-25% of the filter is dark.

 

On the "hard" filters, half of the filter is also clear. The transition from clear to dark all happens roughly within a 4 to 5mm region.

 

Personally, I think the "hard" filters are more useful, especially in compositions that need to darken a bright sky above a clear horizon. Your mileage may vary, but I would check that out first before spending $100 each on filtes.

I agree with comment of Shun Cheung. It's your decision but keep in mind that 'soft edge' means really soft transition.

This isn't meant as a flame to anyone, please don't anyone take it that way. But whenever I read this type of question, I wonder about the price of the lenses these things are going on. I know that I haven't invested in Singh-Ray because I think they're expensive. Isn't that stupid, considering I would be putting a $100 piece of material over a $1,300 lens??? Sometimes I wonder about us...me included!

The lenses I'll be using the filters over aren't "L" series glass or terribly expensive to begin with. But they are clean and functional elements and have produced many, many clear and sharp images over the years. I agree it's not terribly smart to fit a $20.00 piece of acrylic over a $1,000.00+ glass element. However, that's not what I'm doing. I shoot Canon FD manual focus gear - and in this instance, two Singh-Ray filters will cost more than the sum total of the two lenses they'll be used on!

 

But that's fine - the lenses are old technology and as such, they're less expensive. I can buy them on the used market, often as new or very close to it, at a greatly reduced cost. They still do what they're designed to do. However, I feel there is a quality issue coming into play here as well. Speaking generally, if I can buy one filter for $20.00 and another for $100.00, and both do the same thing, and both are sucessful in the market place, then there must be a reason for the difference.

 

I don't object to the price of the Singh-Ray filters; I simply wasn't prepared to spend that much. As I said in a prior post, I now plan to purchase them. I believe they will be an investment towards better images.

I would buy one high quality filter instead of two lower quality filters. I learned my lesson when I bought a "cheap" polarized filter. Choose one, try it out and you will soon know which filter to add to your collection next. Buy them one at a time... and get the best one you can afford.

I use Lee 1, 2, and 3 stop grad ND filters and agree the 2 stop gets the most use. I have the 2 stop filter in both hard and soft grad versions and quit using the soft grad because it is very hard for me to line up the graduation where I want, probably due to my poor eyesight.

I believe I can respond to the original question with some relavance as I have been using Cokin gray grads (2- and 3-stop) along with a Singh-ray ND grad (2-stop) for several years now. The biggest problem with the Cokin grads in my experience is not that they have a slight color cast, it is that the cast is not predictable. One filter may have a slight magenta cast while another may be slightly green. Once you know what your filter does and are happy with it, it's no big deal. We are talking about very slight changes here. Much greater changes in color happen when you change films, or the sun goes behind a cloud, or you change printing papers, etc. The Singh-Ray filters however, can be depended upon for absolute neutrality--for all that's worth. What film is absolutely neutral? The big advantage to the Singh-Ray filters (as mentioned in previous posts) in my experience is the extra length with ultra-wide lenses. There's more to filters than just slight color changes though, and here's the part that some are not going to like. I've tested the Singh-Ray against the Cokin for sharpness on several occasions (same time, same big tripod, same fine-print target, etc.). Each time to my amazement, my older and more scratched cheapo Cokin is significantly sharper, particularly in the transition zone b/w the clear and shaded portions. In photographs in which almost imperceptable color changes are tolerable, I trust the Cokin grads for a sharper transparency/negative.

I'm a full-time professional fine art (primarily nature scenics) photographer. My entire income is derived from selling my original prints, along with some notecards and posters. I've used both the Cokin grads and the Singh Ray grads. In my own experience, both brands render results that are quite sharp. There is a slight color shift with the Cokin grads, but not with the Singh Rays. This doesn't matter to me, since I can correct the color shift in printing. I often use a medium format Pentax 67 for scenic work. My extreme wide angle 45mm Pentax lense has an 82mm filter threading, which requires a larger 4" X 6" graduated filer to insure against vignetting, available from Singh Ray, but not from Cokin. My most used graduated neutral density filter is the Singh Ray 2-stop soft grad. With my Pentax 67, using the Singh Ray filters, I frequently produce 24" X 30" prints from Velvia film that are absolutely razor sharp. There is absolutely no loss of resolution from using the Singh Ray filters on my 30 inch prints. I have not printed as large from 35mm shots made while using the Cokin filters, but have noticed no loss of resolution in smaller prints. For shooting color transparencies, I recommend the Singh Ray filters. Mr Singh lives in Arcadia, Florida. You can call him at his home and speak with him personally when ordering the filters directly from him. The phone number can be found on his web site at www.singhray.com. He is extremely nice and helpful over the phone.

Most places allow a return if you are not satisfied so long as the equipment has no damage marks. For your first roll of film don't use a holder - simply hold it in place in front of your lens with your hand. A holder is easier and more accurate but at least you'll be able to judge the effect and ensure it's the filter you want without scratching it.

 

I live in the SE (SE FL) and find the 2 stop soft Singh-Ray most useful. But, that's a very personal opinion.

 

Mike

I must say that I'm surprised, especially given previous posts on this issue, about the number of people who think the only real options are Cokin ( not true nd; clumsy transition from clear to grey) and the horrifically expensive Singh Ray. I've never even seen a Singh Ray ND grad, but I do know that Hitech and Lee work perfectly well and are much cheaper. The comment above about Hitech not being neutral does not reflect my experience. Can someone with real experience tell me why I - or anyone else - should spend two or three times as much on a Singh Ray as I do on Hitech? This will stop me feeling puzzled about why Singh Ray manage to sell even one filter!

I've always found my HiTech filters to be neutral and I much prefer their gradation to the Singh-Ray ND grads.

I agree with George above that sharp images can be had using the Singh-Ray filters. I also get very

sharp results from my 645 and my 6x9 equipment using them. I did not mean to suggest that there was a

problem with the quality of the Singh-Ray filters.

 

 

However, what amazes me is that I get at least as sharp and sometimes sharper images with my Cokins.

This information will save me money in the future. It is not always true that "you get what you pay for"

and I think that this is the kind of information that can be very useful in this fo

There should be no question of visible loss of sharpness with ND grads. The reasons why Cokin are inferior is not to do with sharpness but concern colour casts and the fact that their use is often obvious on the final image. If sharpness is affected it is because the filter is faulty, not properly clean or damaged.

Building on David H's comments, I too have not experienced any appreciable loss in sharpness using Cokin ND grads. Of greater concern is their color cast (they are after all grey grads), which can make their use obvious. Circumstances may may occur where this is acceptable, even desirable. My prints (I rarely enlarge greater than 11x14, from 35mm) haven't shown the Cokin grey grads to be optically inferior, as long as the are clean and pristine.

 

This leads me to a far greater concern. I have suffered numerous scratches from cleaning these optical resin filters. Although they may be only visible by observing reflections off the filter surface, they are there nonetheless, and usually are a result of a quick and careless(?) cleaning in the heat of shooting (with excellent Microdear lens cloths). Unless Singh-Rays are formulated with some tougher optical resin I am not aware of, I would guess that Singh-Rays would've suffered the same result only that it would have been far more painful given that they cost that much more to buy (and replace, as I did with the Cokins with new Cokins).

 

Finally, I gave up and bought Tiffen glass ND grads (which, to my eye, are indeed *sufficiently* neutral). Hallelujah. No more scratches even under the most rigorous in-the-field cleaning with a lens cloth. The only reasons I could see for ever replacing the Tiffens is to attain a longer length filter or to attain a multicoated grad. (All my other filters are Hoya multicoats.) Regardless, my money's on glass grads for their greater resistance to even the faintest of scratches.

The Cokins do have a shift in colour adn really aren't very sharp either. I guess it's get what you pay for. I use Singh-Ray filters and have their 4 ND Grads.

 

If I only take two filters with me it's a 3 stop hard edged, which isn't very hard anyway and a 2 stop soft. I can get by easily with these two filters.

 

I also use a Singh-Ray Warming Polariser which is very nice indeed although around $160US.

 

Go with Singh-Ray you won't be disappointed<div></div>

I have, over the years, acquired a number of Cokin filters. When they were first introduced, I used the "A" series and, later the "P" series. I used them mainly with 24mm to 85mm manual focus lenses (in the old days when I used Nikons). I never noticed a problem. Then, last summer, I was shooting butterflies on flowers in my back yard when I decided to use the Cokin 81A equivalent filter. I was using my 400mm f/5.6L Canon lens with a Canon 1.4X extender. I put on the filter and WHOA! everything went weird before my eyes. I looked again and, sure enough, the image was distorted beyond belief. I had not used the filter in years so I thought maybe it had, somehow, gotten hot and distorted. I shot without the filter. I then retrieved the box of old Cokins I had stored away as well as some new filters I had bought to use for black and white work. EVERY filter distorted on the 400mm! I then tried other lenses. To simplify my unscientific tests: the Cokin filters showed distortion and diffraction on every lens of 100mm and longer. The longer the lens, the greater the distortion. With my 100-300mm, the distortion was barely visible at 100mm but, by 300mm, it was bad enough to throw the autofocus off. I took all these filters and put them away, never to be used again. I have replaced all the filters I regularly use with Tiffen glass filters. I intend to buy the Singh-Ray grads soon. I really don't use graduated filters with longer lenses, I am usually just trying to hold the sky or a body of water back during exposure with lenses from 20mm to 35mm or so. But, to put it diplomatically, I do not find the Cokin filters to be optically satisfactory.