ND GRAD for an SWC

Hi -

 

I am thinking about taking the amazing step (for me) of buying a filter for my SWC. I have always kind of

prided myself on not using them, but have been taking a lot of flat seascapes recently where I could

probably do with taking some light out of the sky (the horizon is always pretty much dead centre).

 

Anyone have any thoughts on whether a screw in one would be a stupid thing to buy (assuming I am only

buying this for the dead centre horizon shots) or if I should get a square system. If so - what square

system is good for these cameras. I like to have MINIMAL stuff to carry, which is why I like the screw in

idea.

 

I was also wondering whether a -1 stop or a -2 stop graded filter would be most useful. I don't want to

make it too even, but wonder if a 1 stop would be enough.

 

Any experience/thoughts appreciated.

 

RX

What film do you shoot? If it's B&W, a one-stop is a waste IMO as it's just easier to burn in one stop on a sky under the enlarger. Personally, I would even say if you only have one filter, get the two stop - even for chromes.<p>

For ease, get the B60 to 67mm step-up ring, and then you can use plain-Jane 67mm screw-in filters. Of course, I prefer being able to place my horizon with ND grads, but you seem to have already made that decision; favoring simplicity. Careful though, you may get some vignetting...

I use grads a lot and have two filter systems, one based on the Cokin P holder and one based on Lee.

 

My concern with the screw-in would be whether the manufacturer produced truly neutral grads, ive never owned one, so wont comment.

 

For lightness I recommend using Cokin P holder and Hi-tech Grads. Of all the grads the ND0.6, is in my opinion the most useful (2 Stop). I would recommend a soft-transition grad, given that you will be positioning by estimation.

 

The Lee system is great, but bulkier to carry around.

I ditto Tony's answer, since I also use the same system, Cokin and Hi Tech filters on my hassy SWC.

The Lee system certainly is one of the best there is. Much cheaper and slightly less bulky is a used Hasselblad Pro Shade for that camera. They have a slot for drop-in filters.

 

Which model "SWC" do you have? Nikos mentions the 60>67mm step up ring, but I think your's maybe the earlier with series III filters which uses a retaining ring. If so, and when looking for a pro-shade, make sure it comes complete with both adapter rings. One being for the 50mm bayonet and the other is the screw-in retaining ring for the SWC, and the 50 and 60mm Distagon C lenses. Then with the pro-shade you can use an ND grad filter.

 

Too much to carry? Well, you can't have it both ways. If you want control, you need kit. It's our destiny. Just make it work.

 

Cheers, Kevin.

Let me start by saying I've never shot any film using the set up I am going to suggest, but I

have all the necessary equipment and the image looks good in the viewfinder. So this is

the way I would go:

 

Get the ground glass back for your SWC along with the right angle mirror finder. Then use

the Hasselblad circular polarizer filter to adjust the effect to your liking. Slide out the

ground glass/finder assembly, snap on the magazine and expose by guestimating the

filter factor or bracket your exposures.

 

Yes--the Polarizer is most effective when the light is coming from an angle 90-degrees to

the sun--but it does have a substantial effect over a wide range. There is no apparent

vignetting in the finder (I just tried it) so it would seem to me that this would be the most

practical way to go when using the SWC. [i'm presupposing the use of a tripod here

because you mentioned it would be primarily for landscapes.]

 

In fact, it sounds like such a good idea, I may try it myself!

But then don't guesstimate the filter factor. Use the one that is on the filter. ;-)

I knew I shouldn't have suggested trying something without having done it myself. Before

hitting the "Submit" button I paused and said to myself, "What is Q. G. going to say about

this comment?"

 

I guess I could plead ignorance and say, "Oh, is that what those funny little numbers are

for around the filter?"

 

At least Mr. deBakker didn't shoot down the thought that a polarizing filter might provide

you better control under a wider variety of light conditions! Whew! I actually said

something that agreed with him . . . .

<p>ND grads are intended to be used in variable positions relative to the direction and

intensity of the light. You adjust them to match the point of contrast variation in the scene.

They're not going to be much use if they're always fixed in the same position relative to your

lens. And a circular polarizer is of little benefit since it will adjust overall contrast, not relative

contrast - it will be of zero help, for example, when you've got a sky that's 3 stops brighter

than the land, and you're trying to expose both sky and land evenly.</p>

 

<p> Definitely get a square slide-in type system. I wouldn't even consider a screw-in one. In

fact, I can't think of anything less useful for landscape photography.</p>

<p>Sorry - forgot to answer the second part of your question.</p>

 

<p>A 1 stop grad will be much less useful than a 3 stop grad because film already has

sufficient latitude to cope with a 1 stop contrast difference - even slide film. But there are

many typical landscape scenes where the contrast diffference is 3 stops or higher - e.g.

dawn, sunset - and that's when you're really going to need grads.</p>

 

<p>You'll find that a single grad is of limited use. A good bet is a set of 0.3, 0.6, and 0.9

grads which covers the full range from 1-3 stops. Plus, with a square filter system they

can be used in combination to cover all practical situations - giving you theoretical

coverage up to 6 stops difference, should you ever need it.</p>

I mostly use rectangular grads but I do also have a circular version for use with a rangefinder where I've never had any success in positioning the grad accurately. The circular grads are mostly or maybe all soft-edge grads- that is the transition from clear to maximum ND effect is very gradual. Given that with seascapes you aften have the brightest area of the sky close to the horizon, this wouldn't be an great solution for you since this area will be virtually unfiltered.

 

I think the only ND grad solution that will help you greatly is a rectangular/positionable/hard edge filter with a holder. Of the brands available I would not consider Cokin filters but would consider Lee and HiTech. If you do go down this route you will find that there are very good value sets of three filters (1,2,3 stop) and that the extra filters don't add much weight or bulk, but they do improve your ability to react to different conditions and times of day.

 

If you opt for using a polariser, make sure you assess the evenness of polarisation across the frame and check the effect of the polariser on the water. You might decide it isn't what you want.

CPeter,<br><br>Never presume. I agree with Neil and David's comments about the usefulness of a polarizer. Sorry!<br>;-)

thanks all for info so far.

I use slide film and I guess maybe a square filter would make more sense - then I wouldn't be

limited to my seascapes.....Maybe a two stop is the way to go.....I don't think I will be buying

a set of them though....

RX

I am thinking the big problem is going to be to ensure I get a system that won't cause

vignetting. A man in a shop showed me a Cokin P holder, that was lowerprofile for wide

angle, but he couldn't be sure that it wouldn't vignette. I know if I get the P holder I can get a

better filter to put in it anyway, but if it vignettes then it's pretty useless for me......

 

Anyone use a filter system on an SWC that they know doesn't vignette ?

 

R