# Lee Big Stopper vs. Formatt Firecrest?!?!?



## keithfullermusic (Jun 11, 2015)

i've been getting ready to invest in a 100mm square filter system, and since they are pricey i've done tons of research. everything was pointing towards the Lee system. i've heard tons of people complain about how their holder falls off sometimes and their Big Stopper leaves a horrid blue cast - but i couldn't find anything better.

by chance, i started looking into the Hi-Tech Formatt Firecrest filters and they look amazing. even the reviews (i've only found a few) say that they prefer them to their Lee stuff, because they have nearly no color cast and aren't easy-to-break glass. however, i almost find this too good to be true seeing as i've only just now heard of them.

so have any of you used both or at least the firecrest stuff? have any of you used both the lee and hi-tech 100mm filter holder? or have any of you have any experience with this stuff to give me some advice?

thanks,

-Keith


----------



## mkihne (Jun 11, 2015)

Have the 16 and 10 stop versions.....have not performed any side by side tests but appear to be as neutral as possible. I have seen them mentioned in several filter discussions but almost universally ignored in the discussion. Maybe the firecrest filters get confused with F-H's previous filters. Maybe F-H does not do a good job promoting them or getting them compared to Lee or Sing-Ray.

I use the circular almost exclusively but they also have square-rectangular options. These are very thin filters and thus are less prone to vignette and better for stacking for that reason. Wish they were brass mounts but have had no problem with the aluminum. My B&H filters and others I used to use are on a shelf at home.


----------



## The Elusive Panda (Jun 11, 2015)

Hi Keith,

I use the Lee 100mm system, and I've never had an issue with the filter holder falling off. If anything, I'm impressed by the ease of use and quality after carrying it around on a trip to Europe. The Lee adapter rings are expensive, so I wonder if the people having trouble bought cheaper adapters that didn't fit as well.

A few things I noticed: glass filters are easier to clean because they don't scratch as easily and resin filters (like the graduated ND) can be difficult to blow off because of dust clinging with static electricity. Also, shoot a grey card on location and you can easily take care of any color cast in post. I only have a Little Stopper so I can't speak to the color cast issue.


----------



## AlexB (Jun 11, 2015)

Hi

I use the Formatt Hitec Firecrest 4x4 10-stop, 13-stop and 16-stop ND filters together with the Lee Filter Holder and Lee Lens Adapters and Lee Polarizing filter.

I've also heard about the Lee filter holder falling off someones lens. I have also heard about people who sling their tripod over their shoulder with both the camera and filter system still attached, and then complaining that the filter holder fell off "just because of some small branches". The release is spring loaded and will come off if you press from the backside where the release is, but not by itself. It has never been an issue for me. I think this is more of a case where if you use common sense it won't be a problem.

The filters I have are not color neutral. They leave a blue and green tint. I suspect the higher ND's have more tint then the lower ND's have, but I cannot be sure. However, it's easily fixed in post using the white balance temp and tint tools. And I haven't used the Lee ND filters so I cannot say if it's better or worse.

Hope this helps.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jun 11, 2015)

mkihne said:


> Have the 16 and 10 stop versions.....have not performed any side by side tests but appear to be as neutral as possible. I have seen them mentioned in several filter discussions but almost universally ignored in the discussion. Maybe the firecrest filters get confused with F-H's previous filters. Maybe F-H does not do a good job promoting them or getting them compared to Lee or Sing-Ray.
> 
> I use the circular almost exclusively but they also have square-rectangular options. These are very thin filters and thus are less prone to vignette and better for stacking for that reason. Wish they were brass mounts but have had no problem with the aluminum. My B&H filters and others I used to use are on a shelf at home.



Thanks for the response. So you use the circular as opposed to square ones if I read that correctly.

Are you happy with them, or do you notice some frustrations and/or annoyances with flare/etc.?


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jun 11, 2015)

The Elusive Panda said:


> Hi Keith,
> 
> I use the Lee 100mm system, and I've never had an issue with the filter holder falling off. If anything, I'm impressed by the ease of use and quality after carrying it around on a trip to Europe. The Lee adapter rings are expensive, so I wonder if the people having trouble bought cheaper adapters that didn't fit as well.
> 
> A few things I noticed: glass filters are easier to clean because they don't scratch as easily and resin filters (like the graduated ND) can be difficult to blow off because of dust clinging with static electricity. Also, shoot a grey card on location and you can easily take care of any color cast in post. I only have a Little Stopper so I can't speak to the color cast issue.



that's a good point about the "cheap" adapter rings. also, about the little stopper, i haven't heard anything but good reviews about it. while 6 stops is pretty crazy, it's nothing compared to 10 or 16, and i think that's where the real color cast issues tend to set in.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jun 11, 2015)

AlexB said:


> Hi
> 
> I use the Formatt Hitec Firecrest 4x4 10-stop, 13-stop and 16-stop ND filters together with the Lee Filter Holder and Lee Lens Adapters and Lee Polarizing filter.
> 
> ...



thanks for your response, because i'm thinking that i'm going to end up with a mix of things - lee holder and grad nd's but with the firecrest 10 and 16 stoppers.

i tend to agree with your assessment about just using common sense when dealing with these things. however, i think that for the fairly outrageous prices of the holder and adapter rings they should be pretty sturdy - especially when you consider the amount of cash they are holding in those filters.

anyway, i noticed that you said they aren't neutral, but are they a pain to correct? i've heard that the lee big stopper can be extremely annoying at times, but it still seems to be the go-to choice for pros.

either way, are you happy with them?

thanks again for the response.


----------



## lion rock (Jun 11, 2015)

I am quite satisfied with the Big Stopper. Just got the Little Stopper, too, though haven't shoot with it yet.
There's some blue cast with the Big Stopper. But shooting the sky doesn't hurt too much, it emphasizes the blues in the sky somewhat. I loaned the setup to a friend who shoots with Nikon on the same scene, and the blue was just unbearable. Didn't know what his settings were, I sort of suggested to him to go through color correction, but I haven't seen that yet.

The ring and frame clip-on were not truly secure; but no one should treat them like a screw in and move the camera and tripod over the shoulder and expect they stay on no matter the jarring. The glass filter is not shatter-proof on impact. My first Singh-Ray GND (polymer) busted by just clanging on a car door. I learned. If you take time to set up a scene for long exposure with a filter, you can also take the time to put the filter in the the carrying box and frame back in the backpack and unhook the camera from the tripod. <rant>On the rant side, the foam surround in the metal box for the Lee filter can be glued down to the bottom layer (Lee: hope you take the suggestion), as it tends to be come off and may get lost. It is needed to prevent the glass edge from contacting the metal tin, especially on the corners.</rant>
-r


----------



## GuyF (Jun 11, 2015)

AlexB said:


> ...The release is spring loaded and will come off if you press from the backside where the release is, but not by itself. It has never been an issue for me. I think this is more of a case where if you use common sense it won't be a problem.



Yup, the Lee Holder feels pretty secure under normal conditions but I managed to accidentally wrench it off the front of my 16-35 f4 a few weeks ago. I was hanging out a train window in the Scottish west highlands and pulled myself back in pretty rapidly to avoid having my head taken off by some branches. I looked down at my camera and thought, "there's something missing here...". I'd lost the holder, polariser adapter ring and an ND filter thanks to the protruding bottom part of the filter catching the top of the lowered window. Now there's £160 worth of Lee stuff lying by the rail track. I'm sure there's a moral to this story but damned if I can find it...much like my lost gear.

At least the lens and adapter ring survived. I'd have been totally gutted if I'd had the 105mm polariser on at the time.

Will be ordering replacements next week.

:'( :'( :'( :'( :'(


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jun 11, 2015)

GuyF said:


> Yup, the Lee Holder feels pretty secure under normal conditions but I managed to accidentally wrench it off the front of my 16-35 f4 a few weeks ago. I was hanging out a train window in the Scottish west highlands and pulled myself back in pretty rapidly to avoid having my head taken off by some branches. I looked down at my camera and thought, "there's something missing here...". I'd lost the holder, polariser adapter ring and an ND filter thanks to the protruding bottom part of the filter catching the top of the lowered window. Now there's £160 worth of Lee stuff lying by the rail track. I'm sure there's a moral to this story but damned if I can find it...much like my lost gear.
> 
> At least the lens and adapter ring survived. I'd have been totally gutted if I'd had the 105mm polariser on at the time.
> 
> ...



that's awful, and it's exactly why i'm a little freaked out to buy the lee setup. my old cokin p stuff was hard plastic that sort of clipped on the adapter. once it was on there it could easily swivel, but that sucker wasn't coming off. sometimes, i think good companies over-engineer there stuff (ie. lee). i've also heard people say that the cheaper Cokin Z Pro holder is actually better for various reasons - one of which being that it will no accidentally fall off.

also - i live in glasgow, but i'm going up to loch ness, skye, and inverness in a few weeks and i was wondering if you have any suggested places to snap some shots.


----------



## GuyF (Jun 11, 2015)

Keith,

I did a rail tour up to Fort William which was then haulled by steam engine across to Mallaig. Ultimately an expensive trip! Since you're in Glasgow, you should know which parts of the north are ripe for landscape shots - everywhere north of Loch Lomond, Rannoch Moor, Ben Dorain, the church at Polnish, Old Man of Stor, Black Cuillins, Loch Eilt, Glen Miller, Loch Awe, Loch Jaw, Invertumshie, Ben Doon and Ben Dover, honestly, you couldn't make it up 

Plenty scope to use ND grads.

Have fun.


----------



## lion rock (Jun 11, 2015)

Well, the Cokin adaptor wasn't too secure either. I was shooting cherry blossoms in DC about 3 years ago with my Cokin and Singh-Ray GND and after that I walked away and someone yell at me. Being in DC., one has to be careful especially when someone yells at you. I tried to ignore him and kept walking. The yelling became more urgent and I looked back at the guy. He pointed at the ground. It was my filter and holder there on the ground. The little protrusion was not enough to keep the holder from falling.
Well I thank the guy and picked up the parts and went my merry way, somewhat sheepishly, too.
Not being careless is the key. Take time to put away the toys when done.
-r


----------



## wsmith96 (Jun 11, 2015)

keithfullermusic said:


> by chance, i started looking into the Hi-Tech Formatt Firecrest filters and they look amazing. even the reviews (i've only found a few) say that they prefer them to their Lee stuff, because they have nearly no color cast and aren't easy-to-break glass.



I realize this is no help, but I'm in the same boat as you. I'll be investing in a filter system and I ran across the same thing where the Formatt-Hitech products look to be good. I also have not found a poor review of their products. I was going to give them a shot once I saved up enough for one of their landscape kits.


----------



## ScaneLife (Jun 11, 2015)

Have you looked into VU filters? I think they are a newish company.....I have both circular 82mm and the 100x100 and 100x150 (sion version) filters. They are made of glass, not plastic. The holder is really nice and you can screw a circular filter onto it to use behind the drop in filters...and if using a circular polarizer it is controlled from the back of the filter so you can still adjust it even while there are filters in front of it. I can't give much opinion on the optics except to say that I am very happy with the performance.... I have never tried the others. It seems the price is very good too for what you get, even though the filter holder seems more expensive that the other brands, It is very well made though. Anyway, just wanted to let you know about them.


----------



## AlexB (Jun 11, 2015)

keithfullermusic said:


> AlexB said:
> 
> 
> > Hi
> ...



You're welcome.

About the filter holders first: Lee and Formatt Hitec each took their own approach on this, and they both have pro's and con's. Regarding the Formatt Hitec I can only comment on what I have seen, as I haven't used it personally.

The Lee filter holder is designed to be quick and easy to put on and off. And it is also easy to rotate it for adjusting grads and/or polarizing filters since it's not screwed tight on the lens. The negative side of this is that it is not as rock solid as the Formatt Hitec holder.

The Formatt Hitec uses a single screw knob to secure the filter holder to the lens. You first slide the holder onto the lens adapter and then tighten the knob. Once the knob is tightened the filter holder is on there rock solid. So the cons would be that it takes a little bit more time to put on the lens. But what got me is that there is nothing else then that little screw securing your filter holder onto the adapter. If that screw comes just a little bit loose, the filter holder will no longer be secured. Also if you want to rotate the holder you have to loosen the screw and then be careful so it doesn't come off or slides too far forward.

This is what I researched before purchasing. I choose the Lee because in my mind that was the better choice for me, but it may not be right for you. All I can say is I'm happy with my choice.

PS: There is nothing that isn't sturdy about the Lee filter holder. Regarding the holder falling off the lens, it takes quite a bit of pressure from the camera side of the adapter to make it come off. I have no idea how some people have managed to have it fall off on it's own.

Regarding the filters I don't have any reason not to be happy with them. The color cast is easy to correct in Lightroom or Photoshop Camera Raw. All you need to do is adjust the white balance. Normally I have to go high on the kelvin scale and a far bit over to the magenta side.

One thing to note is that the filters doesn't come with the gasket already attached. It can be a bit tricky to get on, and once it's on you cannot get it off again. A tip here is don't remove the center piece of the foam, just leave it there and you'll be fine.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jun 11, 2015)

I am currently building my 100mm filter system and have a few Formatt-Hitech filters as well as their Firecrest 82mm CPL.
I am not an expert on CPL filters but the Firecrest seems significantly better than my Hoya and Kood CPLs - but to be faier they were much cheaper!
Most Formatt-Hitech filters come in either glass or resin so the choice is yours. I have been told that the advantages of the resin filters is that they are more robust and that the tinting is in the resin rather that a coating - though I am not certain of this. Naturally the glass versions are more scratch proof - but is the coating? Probably swings and roundabouts!
I have one of their older ND 0.6 filters which shows little if any colour cast - certainly not worth correcting. I also have one of their older model ND3 (10 stop) filters which does show a colour cast that can be corrected.My latest acquisition is one of their Pro Stop 6 Stop nd filter which gives little cast. Additionally I occasionally use 2 friends Formatt-Hitech filters as they have a lot more of them than I do.
Overall I am very pleased with the newer versions which display significantly less cast than the older models (no longer produced?). Their Firecrest range are top notch quality - but are priced to match.
I cannot say that they are better or worse than Lee filters as I haven't compared enough of them to form any worthwhile opinion, but my friends Pro Stop 10 stop did seem to have less cast than a Lee Big Stopper that I tried.
If you want to go really silly Formatt-Hitech now make 16 stop ND filters - best bring along a picnic if you are using one of those!


----------



## jd7 (Jun 12, 2015)

At the risk of derailing the thread, I have a question for the OP - and anyone else who feels like responding:
what has made you decide to get a 100m filter system?

The reason I ask is that earlier in the year I started getting interested in buying a square/rectangular filter system but was having trouble deciding whether to go with the smaller Cokin-P size (about 85mm?) or the 100mm size.

Apart from being smaller, the Cokin-P size filters are signficantly cheaper. But the trade off seems to be that once you go wider than about 28mm focal length, you get hard vignetting if you have a 3-stack filter holder. If you switch to a one filter holder (eg the Cokin-P wide angle holder or take a standard holder and cut off the brackets for two of the filters) you can get to about 21mm(?) before you get hard vignetting.

The 100mm size is larger and more expensive, but you seem to be able to stack three filters without hard vignetting at a focal length as wide as about 18mm. I think I may have read you can even get to 16mm on the 16-35 f/4 IS (perhaps because of the placement of the filter thread), but I could be wrong about that.

Anyway, looking into filter systems led me to start reading up on exposure blending in software, and to articles like this - http://shuttermuse.com/why-sold-my-graduated-neutral-density-filter/ 

I am now trying to decide to between just buying a couple of screw on ND filters for long exposures (I was given a vari-ND a while ago and have been using that, but the vari-ND filters have a few issues because of the physics involved) and doing exposure blending in software, or getting a Cokin-P size system, or getting a 100mm size system.

So, to come back to my original question - I would be very interested to know what has prompted your decision to go for a 100mm system rather than a Cokin-P size system (I'm presuming it is just how wide a focal length you can use before there is hard vignetting?), and why a square/rectangular system at all rather than just blending exposures in software?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jun 12, 2015)

jd7 said:


> At the risk of derailing the thread, I have a question for the OP - and anyone else who feels like responding:
> what has made you decide to get a 100m filter system?



it's a valid question, but i think i have a valid answer. i used to shoot on a crop body a long time ago, and i just decided to dabble in filters, but didn't want to spend too much. so i ended up buying a cokin p holder with various filters, and i absolutely loved them. however, any sort of long exposure meant i had to go to BW because the color shifts were everywhere. i realized early on that i loved filters and wanted to upgrade to something better.

then i got a FF camera a couple years back and haven't been able to use the filters on certain lenses because you actually see the filter holder - meaning i have to get the larger 100mm ones. also, i do a lot of landscape shots with telephoto lenses then merge them, so i need to have the versatility to put these things on any lens, so no circulars.


----------



## mkihne (Jun 12, 2015)

mkihne said:


> Have the 16 and 10 stop versions.....have not performed any side by side tests but appear to be as neutral as possible. I have seen them mentioned in several filter discussions but almost universally ignored in the discussion. Maybe the firecrest filters get confused with F-H's previous filters. Maybe F-H does not do a good job promoting them or getting them compared to Lee or Sing-Ray.
> 
> I use the circular almost exclusively but they also have square-rectangular options. These are very thin filters and thus are less prone to vignette and better for stacking for that reason. Wish they were brass mounts but have had no problem with the aluminum. My B&H filters and others I used to use are on a shelf at home.



Sorry for the late reply. Trying to keep an already overburdened back pack as efficient as possible, I settled on circular filters. I carry polarizer and several ND filters including The 10 and 16 stop mentioned above. With the 16-35 f4 now at 77mm, I no longer need 82mm for my wide. For landscape I now carry the 16-35, 24-105(I have an extremely good copy....and if good enough for Art Wolfe...what can I say) and have traded out my 70-200 f4 without IS for the new 100-400 which does not take up much more room in my bag but added weight. So I can carry the 4-5 filters I routinely use in the space of a small prime lens.

While others prefer to correct a color cast flaw on every image out of the camera with neutral density filters I would rather start with an image with fewer flaws to begin with. In post with the selection tools, brushes and layer masks now available, I have not found a situation where I cannot produce an image I desire in post, rather than carry a bunch of gradient filters. I do bracket everything possible should I need more than one image to cover the dreaded DR issues. Have not found flare to be an issue any more than you might run into with other choices.

Long story short.....if I can choose a filter with little if any color shift vs the others, the choice is simple for me. If I can accomplish everything I need to do in post I choose not to deal with filter holders and associated issues while making my backpack as light as possible. Obviously everyone's situation differs.


----------



## Halfrack (Jun 12, 2015)

I've got both the Lee and the Hitech holders - the Lee ones are much nicer, plus you can get the stack adapter (hold the filters at different angles). Make sure you have both the WA and normal filter rings, as the WA won't work with every lens - especially those that retract.

Lee doesn't do reverse grads, so Hitech is the answer there, but I have a color cast with the Hitech ND, but it isnt' the Firecrest line. My ND Grads are Lee, and work great.


----------



## JoeKerslake (Jun 12, 2015)

Have a look into NiSi filters too, their holder appears to be very robust, and I'm a big fan of their filters.


----------



## lilmsmaggie (Jun 12, 2015)

Couple of things I've mentioned in other threads concerning the Big Stopper:

The LEE Little Stopper is neutral the Big Stopper is not. To offset some of the blue cast when using the LEE Big Stopper requires that you set your in-camera White Balance to 10,000K. Otherwise, you'll have to adjust in post.

As far as the adapter ring/filter holder falling off: The adapter ring goes onto a lens just like a screw-in filter would and the filter holder itself has prongs that sit in the adapter rings groove. As demonstrated in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5kZLZRwXOw


Unless you're careless putting it on or bumping or hitting the filter holder, I don't know why it would just fall off on its own.

Depending on how your LEE filter holder is configured, you can stack more than 3 filters.

LEE doesn't make a reverse grad. You'll have to look at Singh-Ray or other filter maker.


Solid ND's vs. Graduated: You can't control transitions with a solid ND. 




keithfullermusic said:


> i've been getting ready to invest in a 100mm square filter system, and since they are pricey i've done tons of research. everything was pointing towards the Lee system. i've heard tons of people complain about how their holder falls off sometimes and their Big Stopper leaves a horrid blue cast - but i couldn't find anything better.
> 
> by chance, i started looking into the Hi-Tech Formatt Firecrest filters and they look amazing. even the reviews (i've only found a few) say that they prefer them to their Lee stuff, because they have nearly no color cast and aren't easy-to-break glass. however, i almost find this too good to be true seeing as i've only just now heard of them.
> 
> ...


----------



## jd7 (Jun 13, 2015)

keithfullermusic said:


> jd7 said:
> 
> 
> > At the risk of derailing the thread, I have a question for the OP - and anyone else who feels like responding:
> ...



Thanks for the response Keith.

Can I ask - at what point does hard vignetting (seeing the filter holder in the frame) kick in with your Cokin P gear?

I think I have just about decided to get a couple of screw on NDs for long exposures (and wide apertures in bright light) and see how I go for a while with those and merging multiple exposures. Most of my lenses use a 77mm filter size, and I use a step up ring for the ones which are 67mm, so I won't need to spend that much on screw on filters, and it will avoid the cost of getting into a filter system (at least until I change my mind!) and will give me less to carry when I go out shooting. But I will keep investigating for a bit longer yet!


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jun 13, 2015)

jd7 said:


> Thanks for the response Keith.
> 
> Can I ask - at what point does hard vignetting (seeing the filter holder in the frame) kick in with your Cokin P gear?
> 
> I think I have just about decided to get a couple of screw on NDs for long exposures (and wide apertures in bright light) and see how I go for a while with those and merging multiple exposures. Most of my lenses use a 77mm filter size, and I use a step up ring for the ones which are 67mm, so I won't need to spend that much on screw on filters, and it will avoid the cost of getting into a filter system (at least until I change my mind!) and will give me less to carry when I go out shooting. But I will keep investigating for a bit longer yet!



the widest lens that i currently own is a 20mm, and on a full frame you can see a huge portion of the filter holder. i also have the cokin p wide angle holder (only 2 slots), and it's not much better. on a crop body you can still see vignetting and the regular filter holder if you aren't careful.


----------



## jd7 (Jun 14, 2015)

keithfullermusic said:


> jd7 said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for the response Keith.
> ...



That is consistent with what I've read around the internet. Thanks for confirming it - good to hear it from someone who has used the equipment (you can't always be sure of that when you read something on The Net!).
Cheers


----------



## Valvebounce (Jun 16, 2015)

Hi jd7. 
I bought Cokin ZPro as I wanted a system that would go on all my lenses including my Sigma 150-500mm, quite simply the Cokin P is smaller than the end of that lens. I bought Cokin before I learned about colour cast and have still had some nice enough results despite the colour cast, I'm just now going to try to sort a rather nice sunset shot to see if I can correct the cast! I'm enjoying this thread as it has lots of good info including some of the slider adjustments that might help me. Thanks to all for that. 

Cheers, Graham. 




jd7 said:


> At the risk of derailing the thread, I have a question for the OP - and anyone else who feels like responding:
> what has made you decide to get a 100m filter system?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


----------



## svensl (Jun 16, 2015)

I friend has done a very nice review of the mentioned filters. Have a look yourself:
Lee Big Stopper vs HiTech Firecrest
http://www.stuartlowphotography.co.uk/lee-big-stopper-vs-hitech-firecrest-irnd/


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jun 16, 2015)

svensl said:


> I friend has done a very nice review of the mentioned filters. Have a look yourself:
> Lee Big Stopper vs HiTech Firecrest
> http://www.stuartlowphotography.co.uk/lee-big-stopper-vs-hitech-firecrest-irnd/



i actually saw that one a week ago. every review i've read sort of says the same thing, which leads me to believe that the firecrest ones are the real deal.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jun 16, 2015)

lilmsmaggie said:


> Couple of things I've mentioned in other threads concerning the Big Stopper:
> 
> The LEE Little Stopper is neutral the Big Stopper is not. To offset some of the blue cast when using the LEE Big Stopper requires that you set your in-camera White Balance to 10,000K. Otherwise, you'll have to adjust in post.
> 
> ...



A two stop and an upside down one stop will give a simular effect to a reverse grad. The boundary line can be controlled by how far you invert the bottom or raise the top filter, making it quite flexible and more applicable. 

ND solid filters are usually used to make two exposures which are faded into one another in photoshop. It's a better looking technique, the filters are cheaper and the result look more natural with no hard transition line.


----------



## jd7 (Jun 17, 2015)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi jd7.
> I bought Cokin ZPro as I wanted a system that would go on all my lenses including my Sigma 150-500mm, quite simply the Cokin P is smaller than the end of that lens. I bought Cokin before I learned about colour cast and have still had some nice enough results despite the colour cast, I'm just now going to try to sort a rather nice sunset shot to see if I can correct the cast! I'm enjoying this thread as it has lots of good info including some of the slider adjustments that might help me. Thanks to all for that.
> 
> Cheers, Graham.
> ...



Hi Graham

How do you find the Cokin Z-Pro holder?

Sounds like you think the Cokin 100mm filters are usable but not great. Does that sound fair?

From everything I've read - including your post - it seems to me that if I am going to get a square/rectangular filter system, I want 100mm rather than the Cokin P size. I don't have any lenses as physically large as your 150-500, so in my case I am thinking about use on wide angle lenses. If you use the Cokin P size and want to be able to stack filters, it seems you can expect to see the filter holder in the corners of the frame even by the time you get to 24mm focal length (perhaps starting at about 28mm focal length?). And even if you use a Cokin P wide angle holder, it still looks like you can expect to see the filter holder in the corners of the frame at around 20mm focal length, and I do have an eye on picking up a 16-35 at some point. I think in the end I would find the Cokin P size system frustrating.

It seems like getting set up with a 100mm filter kit isn't cheap though! And I have read it is worth paying the extra for glass filters because resin filters scratch easily so you can expect to replace them every couple of years ... and then I read that the glass filters are easy to break anyway ...


----------



## Valvebounce (Jun 17, 2015)

Hi jd7. 
The Z-Pro holder seems to be a good sturdy item, they are made of engineering plastic but that is not a real disadvantage these days, the spring blades, also plastic, that hold the filters in place are firm but not excessively so. The holder slips over the adapter ring, much like how the filters fit, there are three pegs to position it, push one in fit push it back. As for the risk of dropping off, I have not had a problem, but if I'm moving more than a few feet done by lifting the fully deployed tripod a few inches walking a few paces and placing it back down, I would remove the filter and put it back in its soft pouch, then the holder and put that in the bag then move. Even then if it is less than a couple of hundred yards I would shoulder the tripod, more than that everything is packed down, I'm not a great fan of treating my gear or shoulder that way. 

I like the effects afforded by ND filters, have a limited budget, understand you get what you pay for as a premise and am not a professional photographer who has to make money from most shots with relative ease. If it has a bit of a cast but is close I can live with it! :-\

Plastic filters scratch glass shatter when dropped, 6 or half a dozen? 
The biggest thing with the Z-Pro system is the much reduced choice of filters from Cokin, don't know about other brands. You need what you need, wide or large diameter long lenses require bigger filters, I worked out early that the Z-Pro range was going to give me what I needed. I have two Z-Pro holders, (by accidental double gift) if I go wide (requires purchasing a lens first) and get vignetting I will remove one or two of the filter slots from the second holder to leave two or one slots to reduce or remove the vignetting. 

I may be wrong about this, but my perception is that the colour cast is worse (more visible, has greater impact) for sunsets than when shooting well lit waterfalls to get that creamy water effect!? :-\ : 

Cheers, Graham. 



jd7 said:


> Hi Graham
> 
> How do you find the Cokin Z-Pro holder?
> 
> ...


----------



## jd7 (Jun 18, 2015)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi jd7.
> The Z-Pro holder seems to be a good sturdy item, they are made of engineering plastic but that is not a real disadvantage these days, the spring blades, also plastic, that hold the filters in place are firm but not excessively so. The holder slips over the adapter ring, much like how the filters fit, there are three pegs to position it, push one in fit push it back. As for the risk of dropping off, I have not had a problem, but if I'm moving more than a few feet done by lifting the fully deployed tripod a few inches walking a few paces and placing it back down, I would remove the filter and put it back in its soft pouch, then the holder and put that in the bag then move. Even then if it is less than a couple of hundred yards I would shoulder the tripod, more than that everything is packed down, I'm not a great fan of treating my gear or shoulder that way.
> 
> I like the effects afforded by ND filters, have a limited budget, understand you get what you pay for as a premise and am not a professional photographer who has to make money from most shots with relative ease. If it has a bit of a cast but is close I can live with it! :-\
> ...



Glad to hear the Cokin Z-Pro holder is pretty good.

If I go with a filter system, I'm thinking about trying Haida filters:
http://www.haidaphoto.com/en/products.php?tid=115
They seem to be towards the cheaper end of the market and I've seen more than a few positive reviews on the internet for their screw in filters and their square/rectangular filters. I have found a place near me which sells a fair range of Haida gear, although unfortunately they seem to be missing the 100 series grad NDs.

Haida does make a filter holder, but I gather the Haida 100 series filters can be used with other holders like the Cokin Z-Pro and Lee. Given your review of the Cokin Z-Pro, I think I'd lean towards it rather thany trying the Haida.

I'm still on the fence about whether to get a 100mm filter system or just try to use multiple exposures and exposure merging/blending though. I like the idea of doing more in the field and less in post, but then you consider the cost of filters plus the fact they would be more gear to carry, ... But then again, so far my efforts at exposure merging have established I have a lot to learn


----------



## Valvebounce (Jun 18, 2015)

Hi jd7. 
Please bear in mind my "review" is from a very amateur position with respect to filters, I probably have between 100-200 pictures in total taken with filters, of those I've probably got 2 dozen I might show others, I still have not got the colour cast out of the sunset I mentioned, predominantly due to a lack of time and an overwhelming aversion to that series of shots, as in I've opened them more than once and gone back to something else! 
I'd like to think you can test some Cokin before buying to see what you think. If you are anywhere within striking distance of the Isle of Wight (southern England not America!) you can try mine. 

Cheers, Graham. 



jd7 said:


> Glad to hear the Cokin Z-Pro holder is pretty good.
> 
> If I go with a filter system, I'm thinking about trying Haida filters:
> http://www.haidaphoto.com/en/products.php?tid=115
> ...


----------



## Hector1970 (Jun 19, 2015)

My 2 cents is:
I've been using Lee Filters for years.
They are very good at what they do both the graduated and the stoppers.
They scratch easily , hard to keep clear and the glass ones don't bounce.
Their price is outrageous for what they are.
They must be making alot of money.
When there are shortage of Lee Filters I started using Hi-Tech's filters (who make the Firecrest).
I must say I'm impressed with them. They are (or least were) cheaper than Lee.
I found them good, hard to compare exactly as slight differences in Colour cast are hard to compare.
I have the Firecrest 16 Stop - very useful for special purposes.
The firecreast / Hi-tech fit the Lee holders no problem.


----------



## jd7 (Jun 26, 2015)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi jd7.
> Please bear in mind my "review" is from a very amateur position with respect to filters, I probably have between 100-200 pictures in total taken with filters, of those I've probably got 2 dozen I might show others, I still have not got the colour cast out of the sunset I mentioned, predominantly due to a lack of time and an overwhelming aversion to that series of shots, as in I've opened them more than once and gone back to something else!
> I'd like to think you can test some Cokin before buying to see what you think. If you are anywhere within striking distance of the Isle of Wight (southern England not America!) you can try mine.
> 
> Cheers, Graham.



Hi Graham

Sadly for me I'm on pretty much the exact opposite side of the world, otherwise I'd be trying to take you up on your offer! And don't worry, I won't hold you (very!) responsible if I end up with the Cokin and I don't like it! 

For the time being I am still putting my energy into learning about exposure blending in Photoshop, so I avoid adding more gear to my kit. If I can't find a way to get results I like though, I'll give the Cokin Z or the Haida 100mm filter holder and a couple of filters a try.

Hope you're enjoying taking photos and learning about filters. I'll keep an eye out around CR for your handiwork.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jun 30, 2015)

so i went with the Lee filter holder and the Firecrest 16. i think i made the right choice, because i love both of them.

in terms of color cast, the firecrest does have some, but not much. if i take a test shot with no filter and set the white balance to cloudy i will have to set the filter shot to shade. also, the more you underexpose, the bluer the shot comes out, but when the shot is properly exposed the color cast is nearly gone. the other thing that i noticed is that the firecrest is actually a little over 16.5 stops.

here is a picture i shot with it the other day. the blue cast was added in post, which in this picture i actually liked. also, it made Flickr Explore.



Loch Ness by Keith Fuller, on Flickr


----------



## jd7 (Jun 30, 2015)

keithfullermusic said:


> here is a picture i shot with it the other day. the blue cast was added in post, which in this picture i actually liked. also, it made Flickr Explore.



Fantastic shot Keith!


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jul 2, 2015)

jd7 said:


> keithfullermusic said:
> 
> 
> > here is a picture i shot with it the other day. the blue cast was added in post, which in this picture i actually liked. also, it made Flickr Explore.
> ...



thanks. i'm still getting a hang on the best way to utilize it.


----------



## wsmith96 (Jul 3, 2015)

That's an awesome shot. I love the blue cast and how it gives a mysterious, almost ominous feel to the scene.


----------



## Click (Jul 3, 2015)

keithfullermusic said:


> here is a picture i shot with it the other day. the blue cast was added in post, which in this picture i actually liked. also, it made Flickr Explore.




Awesome. Well done Keith.


----------



## LesC (Jul 21, 2015)

I have a (non Firecrest) Hitech 10 stopper & the blue cast is easily removed if you want to but varies according to camera used I've found - the blue cast was quite prominent on my 40D but much less pronounced on a 6D.

As to the Lee holder coming off, I've got both genuine Lee adaptor rings & a couple of other makes - 'Serk' and 'the Filter dude' (tried the Serk as they make an 82mm WA adaptor with internal thread so you can use a lens cap) and the fit is definately looser with these compared to the genuine Lee rings.

Having said that, I beleive the lee holder is designed so that if you unintentionally snag the holder on something, it will 'only' pull the holder off rather than say toppling over your camera/tripod.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 22, 2015)

I'd consider the Lee Filter holder a good designed.
It fits well on the ring.
It rotates easily.
I've never had it fall off but it's easy and quick to remove.
It holds the filters well. 
They slide up and down easily but don't fall out.
The cast on a 10 Stop tends to be quite pleasant and it's easily removable post processing.
Hi-Tech are very good. Their 16 Stop filter is a great addition.
They fit the Lee Filter Holders perfectly.


----------



## lholmes549 (Jul 22, 2015)

I was in the same spot as you a few months back and eventually ended up going for the Lee Holder system with the Wide angle adaptors for my 16-35mm but all of the filters I chose to use are Formatt-Hitech. I have 1-3 stop ND soft grads and the Firecrest 10stop ND. 

I had looked for a while at getting the Formatt holder system as well but read some reviews that discouraged me. I would have preferred the sturdier metal build of the system, but ultimately I wanted reliability and weight savings are always nice as a landscape photographer. 

I have found the Lee holder system has worked a charm; it is easy to put on and take off without ever falling off unnecessarily. One small problem has been that the F-H ND grads must be slightly thinner than the Lee equivalent as they sometimes slide a bit if I move the camera about A LOT, but generally it is not a worry and they have certainly never fallen out of their own accord. I also couldnt fit the 10 stop ND PLUS foam gasket in the Lee holder, but not sure if this is everyones experience. 

The ND grads are pretty neutral and have never run up against any massive issues with them. The 10 stop Firecrest is just astoundingly neutral for such a dark filter and have absolutely no problems with it compared to previous 10 stops I have owned, namely B+W.

All in all I heartily recommend Formatt-Hitechs Firecrest filters and they work well with the Lee holder system for me.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Jul 22, 2015)

keithfullermusic said:


> jd7 said:
> 
> 
> > keithfullermusic said:
> ...



Curious, what time of day was that taken? Please describe the experience. Thanks!


----------



## GaryJ (Jul 22, 2015)

I use the Firecrest 16,10 & 3,also have and use B+W 10 and 6. Firecrest are the best from my experience,properly exposed images[over 5-6 mins] are almost colour cast free,a touch of blue maybe,the B+W have a slight brownish cast ,both are easily addressed in Lr or Ps.Mine are all screw in and I stack with vignetting .


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jul 23, 2015)

RustyTheGeek said:


> Curious, what time of day was that taken? Please describe the experience. Thanks!



The sun wasn't at its highest, but i'd say it was about 45 degree up there on it's way down. i'll try and post the out of camera shot and the test exposure shot right before it so you can see what it actually looked like to the eye.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 23, 2015)

The Lee Filter holder system is designed to a set tension on its rings which are made to very strict tolerances. In over 10 years of using the holder almost weekly Ive never had it "fall off" including carrying my tripod on my shoulder with the camera attached (not recommended). Ive read one report from a pro blogger complaining about their holder falling off out of how many hundreds of thousands sold around the world that seem a very very low average. 
All resin filters regardless of who makes them will scratch easier than glass but glass grads would be way more expensive than resin and people complain about the cost of resin filters. All Lee resin filters are made by hand by experts and checked individually on spectrometers & for optical flatness, all glass filters are equally individually checked and its the density of 10-16 stop or more filters that create the color cast your never eliminate this in dyed in glass filters. Lee recommend setting the white balance manually with the big stopper to 10,000K the chart with the filter explains this and when used correctly does not create a color cast.
I cannot speak to Hitech firecrest filters because Ive never used them but I would doubt they are completely neutral at 16 stops.

One final point, we spend hundreds if not thousands on lenses yet complain about the cost of filters we put in front of the lens which need to be optically clear, optically flat and where possible neutral. A well made filter is as critical to the end result as the lens itself so is an optical component of the light relay system anything less degrades the image and 50MP sensors will only go to show this far quicker.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 23, 2015)

The resin used in filters is the same type of resin used for modern day glasses from Nikon, Zeiss, Essilor etc. and thefor has a very high Abbe value, the eye Abbe value is between 45-50. The second most important feature is clarity early prescription glasses used CR-39 developed for B-17 bomber fuel tanks in WWII. This tended to be slightly yellow and yellowed with age, modern compounds of ADCs are neutral. They weigh half the weight of glass and have a transmission value similar to crown glass and whilst they scratch easier than glass they are far stronger. Ive resin filters Ive owned for 8 years that are perfectly fine I have no issue using them.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jul 23, 2015)

Here are the shots. The first one is the test (no filter), the second is with the filter straight out of camera, and the last one is the edited one.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Jul 23, 2015)

Thanks Kieth! Those three shots really tell a lot. Great job!


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jul 23, 2015)

RustyTheGeek said:


> Thanks Kieth! Those three shots really tell a lot. Great job!



i should also note that they were shot with the 20mm 2.8, and it does strange color things on long shots that don't have anything to do with the filter. when i use the 35 art, they come out even cleaner.


----------

