ND & grad filter decisions...

[henry_l]

<p>Been thinking about getting a graduated ND, and a 2 stop ND for some landscape type work. I don't do a whole lot of landscape stuff, but there are many times walking about I see scenes with high contrast, that I wish I had a grad with me to preserve detail in the highlights.<br>

So i'm on the fence regarding the rectangular or round types. I shoot with a crop body, EF-S 10-22, EF 24-105, both 77mm. I also have the 50 1.4 and 85 1.8, both 58mm. I already have a set of B+W, thin UV and CPL for my 77mm, and 58 to 77mm adapter ring.<br>

From a standpoint of cost, and convenience, which method? With the rectangulars, I'd have to get a holder plus the ND, and ND Grad. whereas if I get the round (77mm set), I just need the ND and the grad, and forgo holder, and I still can use it with my 58mm size lenses. I know the limitations of having a round grad with less control of where the grad line lies in the frame. I'm leaning towards getting a soft edge rather than a hard edge grad.<br>

Do any of you use the 50 or 85 with these filters? Should I have the desire to have the filters adapt for these lenses?<br>

Please advise. Thanks.</p>

[henryp]

<blockquote>

<p>I know the limitations of having a round grad with less control of where the grad line lies in the frame.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not <em>less control</em> -- <strong>no</strong> control. IMO that trumps and I vote for rectangular.</p>

<p>Henry Posner<br /><strong>B&H Photo-Video</strong></p>

[JDMvW]

<p>For the graduated ND there's no alternative really to the Cokin-style system.</p>

<p>With the round GNDs, it's very awkward to get the transition where it needs to be except by composing it so and then cutting off much of the image in processing.</p>

<p>In my personal experience, I don't see the advantage in buying the very expensive alternatives to the actual Cokin filters. Filter <em>holders</em> are not only cheap in the Cokin brand, but are also widely available in serviceable clones very cheaply. I'm not so sure about the quality of some of the clone filter squares, but I got a few of rarely used (by me) types and they seem to work OK. The Fotodiox site used to offer good deals on Cokin-P clones, but there seem to be some problems in their website right now.</p>

[mwtphoto]

<p> I will third the opinion that the rectangular grad are the way to go.</p>

[howard_m]

<p>4th, you dont want round GNDs</p>

[craig_meddaugh]

<p>5th</p>

[howard_m]

<p>4th, you dont want round GNDs</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>I have both rectangular and screw-in grads. The only reason I have a screw-in is to use with a MF rangefinder where I can't position the rectangular grad accurately. That aside I would not choose to use it with any camera system where I can see ttl and so position a rectangular grad properly. </p>

<p>It's not right to imply that screw in grads are useless. But they are very limited and are most useful in specific circumstances that don't relate strongly to your photography. You are thinking about cost and convenience. Neither of these are at all important unless the system does what you need.</p>

[henry_l]

<p>OK....I see a trend here. Looks like I'll be going rectangular. thanks all for your opinions. much appreciate. I just needed that push in the right direction.</p>

[mike_hitchen]

<p>Graduated - get the rectangular<br>

Simple Neutral Density - round ones will do</p>

[dan_south]

Rectangular

 

Singh-Ray makes the best in my experience. When I shot film predominantly I used grads very frequently.

 

I like hard-edged ND grads but many people swear by the more sloping variety.

 

A Cokin holder will probably be fine for your purposes.

 

Remember this trick. Hold your depth of field preview button as you position the filter or it will not be in the right position

(unless you are shooting with the lens wide open).

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>hard-edged ND grads</p>

</blockquote>

<p>How can it be "hard-edged" and "graduated" at the same time? ;)</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>if you really want a grad ND, definitely get the rectangular one so you can adjust for the horizon, however instead of spending $100 on a grad ND and only getting one filter, or spending hundreds to get all types, 1,2,3 stop, hard and soft, I'd get HDR software like Photomatix for $100. This will represent a high contrast scene the way you see it without a filter and you can fine tune the exposure adjustments just the way you want instead of being stuck with what the filter gives you. A neutral ND is a good filter to have. That and a polarizer are the only filters I really see "necessary" now that post processing can do most everything else. These are the only two that can't be duplicated in post.</p>

<p>As for HDR, use it properly.....like this<br>

<a href="http://www.photo-hdr.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/118.jpg">http://www.photo-hdr.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/118.jpg</a></p>

<p>...and don't abuse it like this...<br>

<a href="http://cdn.blinqphotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/hdr-truck.jpg">http://cdn.blinqphotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/hdr-truck.jpg</a></p>

[15sunrises]

<p>Another voice preaching getting rectangular. I would suggest <strong>not</strong> getting the actual Cokin filters though (the holder is fine). They have a very noticeable pink/magenta cast (in most cases), I couldn't deal with it anymore. </p>

<p>I eventually upgraded to Hi-tech ND grad filters and haven't looked back. To be honest, it's completely changed how many pictures I take now that I know I don't have to spend a bunch of time in front of the monitor afterwards. A good set of grad ND filters is invaluable in my opinion for landscape work.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>I think its fair to point out that HDR software is not a complete replacement for ND grads. </p>

<p>There are circumstances where it isn't really possible to take several identical (save for exposure level) photographs. For instance when you want to handhold; where there is movement somewhere in your photograph and so on.</p>

<p>You might also question whether it is always going to be faster and more convenient to use a software solution afterwards rather than a grad at the point of taking. Depends where you'd rather spend your time really.</p>

[dan_south]

JDM, good question! The graduation is the marked, measured difference between the clear side to the dark side. Graduation doesn't mean gradual. It means marked differently at different levels as in a graduated cylinder in a chemistry laboratory. Indeed, a graduate is someone with a degree versus someone who does not have a degree. There is nothing gradual about the difference. It's binary.

[philip_wilson]

<p>Square / rectangular filters work best for this application. I use screw in Circ Pol and I have a 9 stop screw in ND grad (for very strong ND you need a light tight seal at the edges) but for 1-3 stop ND and Nd grad I use Cokin P and X filters (Lee, Tiffin, B&W all make good 100mm filters as well). In terms of the edge it depends what you shoot - lakes and sea is best with a hard edge. Mountain work best with a soft edge. You should get Cokin P series for a less than $50 and the chineese Cokin holders are quite usable (although not quite as good as the real thing). You will be fine with P series I think - the only lens I have a problem with P series on is the 16-35 F2.8 II. this lens is 82mm filter diameter (the max for P series) and very wide on full frame.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>Not mentioned here (I think) is the method of taking two frames differing in exposure (ala HDR, mentioned above) and then combining them as two layers, where the darker top (sky) layer is faded towards the bottom, progressively revealing the lighter bottom (ground) layer. This is exactly the same effect as achieved with a grad ND, except that it doesn't cost anything, and the photographer has more control. The gradation pattern does not need to be uniform or linear. In fact the layers can be cut very sharply (with a feather of 2-3 pixels) between different elements in the photo. Although this is not a "fast" or "convenient" solution, it's probably the best AND the cheapest solution.</p>

<p>This can even be done (not as well) with two contrasts of the same frame, in the event there's motion in the image or if the camera is handheld (per David's discussion). A grad ND would be absolutely useless for this picture.<br /><img src="http://www.graphic-fusion.com/phyosemiterapids01sm.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="467" /></p>