# Main difference in ND filter?



## CanonGuy (Feb 2, 2012)

I've been looking for ND filter to my 77mm lens collection, so what's the difference between those 'Stops' and 'Multi-coated and non-coated' and ND or X value means effect's strength.
And of course difference between manufactures.


----------



## NormanBates (Feb 2, 2012)

check my comments here:
http://www.similaar.com/foto/tuten/630.html

and my tests with various cheap-ish options here:
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsn.html


----------



## D.Sim (Feb 3, 2012)

each stop in the ND filter will correspond to one stop on the camera itself. IE: If you were to shoot at, say, f/2.8 and 1/2000, with a 1 stop ND filter you'd be shooting one stop down, f/2.8 and 1/1000 to get the same amount of light. so on up the line. 

Multi coating basically introduces additional small "layers" that help how the light passes the filter, essentially reducing reflections, etc. There was a pretty good article on this in Canon Rumors a while ago... trying to look for it, will link once I can. Some of the newer ones also have an additional coating that helps with the cleaning - I've had one demonstrated where a sharpie was used, and all that was needed to remove it was just a simple cleaning cloth. Are you going to draw on your filter with a sharpie? Probably not, but basically it'll be easier to clean if you do need to.

As far as brands go, different people will have different opinions, but basically the idea is the same. Don't be cheap. Be prepared to spend on it, as if you buy a cheap one, the quality of your images will suffer more. That said, don't just buy one based on price, a high quality, high grade filter will be what you're after.


----------



## revup67 (Feb 13, 2012)

As mentioned everyone has their personal opinion on these filters and brands. I've learned recently that even a high quality filter can present issues. Recently I had thought to get the Light Craft Fader that claimed to offer 2-10 stops as a variable ND (their newest HD series). In my opinion this was a gross exaggeration. I posted a few test shows in the lens forum for the 16-35 mkii lens in comparison to a Hoya ND400 9 stop filter on a 72mm lens since Hoya doesn't make this filter for an 82mm. The Fader couldn't touch the uniformity nor the 9 stop range of the Hoya ND400 so the fader went back. I replaced it with a B&W 82mm 10 stopper and a Hoya HD Pro ND64 (6 stopper). As the author above me writes..dont' go cheap. They are correct.do your research. I do stick with specific Hoya & Marumi's and B&W..I've never had an issue. To further illustrate check out this UV filter review..note the winner and how Tiffen's were dead last in degrading the final image and note how a specific "cheaper" Hoya beat out a more expensive Hoya in the results (note I didn't say "cheap" I said "cheaper" http://www.lenstip.com/113.1-article-UV_filters_test.html note line #4 for the summary.


----------



## Quasimodo (Feb 13, 2012)

I have a question for Revup67 and you others. I have a 16-35 II and I want to buy a variable ND filter for it. I saw in one of the others posts here that B&W had a ten stop fader, but when I searched for it, I could not find it. Is it necessary to have a 82mm slim? I was told so when I got the lens (because the normal filterthread thickness would crop the picture at the wide end, so I bought a protective UV filter slim from B&W).


----------



## Quasimodo (Feb 13, 2012)

Thank you for your answer D.Sim.

I have a full format camera (5D mkII) and I got the impression of the cropping after reading the lens review on the-digital-picture.com http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

"Unfortunately, a normal thickness UV filter causes some additional vignetting at 16mm when mounted on a full frame body. This can be seen using the mouseover feature in the lens vignetting comparison. So, the B+W 82mm MRC Slim UV Filter is going to be the best full frame option in my opinion. Users of 1.3x and 1.6x crop bodies will be fine with the normal thickness B+W 82mm MRC UV Filter." 

So I assumed that I needed the slim type and bought the one he proposed.

One thing that I did not forsee was that when you have a slim filter on the lens, you cannot put the Canon hood/lenscap? in front, as it cannot get hold. Instead B&W provided with the filter a rubber/plastic thing with Schneider written on it. This is not a problem per. se, but it seems like it could fall off during hiking with the lens.

But if I were to get a slim type for this 16-35 lens. Do there exist any ND faders that I can buy, and if so, where?


----------



## D.Sim (Feb 13, 2012)

Quasimodo said:


> Thank you for your answer D.Sim.
> 
> I have a full format camera (5D mkII) and I got the impression of the cropping after reading the lens review on the-digital-picture.com http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
> 
> ...



Personally, if you were hiking you'd probably have the lenscap off, and just the hood on for some protection, so shouldn't be an issue. The hood would also fit the outside of the lens itself, so you shouldn't have a problem tehre.

As far as ND Faders go, I assume you're taking about ND Grads? If so, I'd suggest going for a Cokin kit, if I remember correctly there should be a slim filter holder available that holds only one square filter - as opposed to multiple - and the step rings necessary.


----------



## 87vr6 (Feb 13, 2012)

I'm not a professional by any means, but I've used the singh ray vari-nd on a more than a few occasions and it does not seem to affect my image quality what so ever. and I usually use it on a 70-200 IS II.... 

http://www.singh-ray.com/varind.html


Just sayin...


----------



## canonphotodude (Feb 13, 2012)

This Filter works great. The mounting ring is super thin and the filter ring is flared out larger so you don't get a vignette. I use it primarily on my 17-40 f4 L for landscape stuff. And the variable range is great. Plus it is a fraction of the cost of the Singh Ray.

http://www.amazon.com/77mm-Fader-ND-Mark-II/dp/B003RDF2MS


----------



## Quasimodo (Feb 13, 2012)

Thank you for your advice

I'm still not sure if it will crop some or not.. The 17-40 is mentioned here and there it seems to be fine. But could it be that there is a differnce to the 16-35 II, due to different contruction?

Has anyone used a ND ring filter for the 16-35? or is this one of the lenses that gets people over on Lee or Sing Ray systems?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2012)

Quasimodo said:


> I'm still not sure if it will crop some or not.. The 17-40 is mentioned here and there it seems to be fine. But could it be that there is a differnce to the 16-35 II, due to different contruction?
> 
> Has anyone used a ND ring filter for the 16-35? or is this one of the lenses that gets people over on Lee or Sing Ray systems?



The 16-35 has a wider aperture, which makes it more susceptible to vignetting. Having said that, I did some empirical testing. The 16-35mm II has a fair amount of native optical vignetting, but in this test could tolerate a standard B+W (F-Pro) filter without additional optical vignetting. Vignetting worsened with a stacked XS-Pro + F-Pro (meaning a standard CPL would increase vignetting), and 2 F-Pro filters resulted in mechanical vignetting. Click on the image for testing details (and mount thicknesses to compare to other brands).

I've used an 82mm slim CPL and an 82mm 10-stop ND with no problem, but before putting one on, I remove the XS-Pro UV filter that I normally keep on the lens.


----------



## Quasimodo (Feb 13, 2012)

thanks a lot Neuro. If I understand you correct, you use a 10 stop fader ND (not slim?). And looking at your test, it seems like something I should go for. You use the B&W?

The whole Lee system, while I believe that it is probably superior (handmade and all) seems to me to be to much hazzle.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2012)

Quasimodo said:


> thanks a lot Neuro. If I understand you correct, you use a 10 stop fader ND (not slim?). And looking at your test, it seems like something I should go for. You use the B&W?
> 
> The whole Lee system, while I believe that it is probably superior (handmade and all) seems to me to be to much hazzle.



'Fader ND' generally refers to a variable ND filter, where you turn one part of the filter to change the 'density'. I don't use a variable ND filter, just solid filters. On a lens like the 16-35mm on FF, a variable ND filter would be a problem - if you've ever used a polarizer on an ultrawide lens, you've probably seen the uneven polarization you get starting at 24mm (or even narrower, sometimes). A variable ND is basically a linear polarizer stacked on a circular polarizer, and with an ultrawide lens, that uneven polarization translates to density variations across the frame. 

A 'standard' F-Pro mount (or other brand that's 5mm thick) would not increase vignetting. There's only one screw-in 82mm 10-stop ND filter that I'm aware of, and that's from Schneider Optics (B+W's parent company). It's a standard mount filter, not slim. I was close to going with a rectangular system (either Lee or Schneider Optics), and I still might someday to use graduated ND filters (where a screw-in filter is too limiting).


----------



## Quasimodo (Feb 13, 2012)

Ok, thanks again. So solid there is. 10 stop B&W (Schneider). I have a ND 2, 4, and 8 at 77mm for my 24-105 and 70-200L IS II. Does a 10 stop mean that it gets even darker, or is it another system for measuring?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2012)

Quasimodo said:


> Ok, thanks again. So solid there is. 10 stop B&W (Schneider). I have a ND 2, 4, and 8 at 77mm for my 24-105 and 70-200L IS II. Does a 10 stop mean that it gets even darker, or is it another system for measuring?



Different scales. Relative to the ND2, 4, and 8 that you have, a 10-stop filter would be ND1000 (technically, ND1024). ND8 is 3 stops. Each stop is an cumulative exponential factor of two, for example 3 stops is 23 = 8, thus ND8. 

See this wiki article, and the table in there.


----------



## revup67 (Feb 14, 2012)

re: Quasimodo - not sure if you found my link here in the forum but for convenience here it tis:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,3159.0.html this clearly shows examples of the higher quality ND fader such as the one by Light Craft and their latest 82mm 2-10 stopper.

I returned this higher quality fader as I was most disappointed in many aspects. I ultimately went with a B&W 10 stopper as Neuro has suggested as well as a ND64 Pro hoya 6 stopper. I found them to be more consistent and reliable and no vignetting issues though I do have a cropped EOS 7D sensor. If you have a concern about vignetting I can tell you the Hoya ND64 has a 3mm surface ring vs. some of the competitive 5mm ones out in the market place. That might be one feature to shop for during your quest.


----------



## Quasimodo (Feb 14, 2012)

Thanks a lot


----------



## bycostello (Feb 23, 2012)

coated less reflections and flare.... the strength is how many stops of light it will remove....


----------

