Question about buying first filters

[dfinn]

I think I've got this right but I wanted to run it by some other people first. I'm looking to pick up some filters. I'm thinking probably a ND, a grad ND and maybe a reverse grad ND. What is the best way to purchase these in a way that they can be used across all of my lenses?

What I'm thinking is that I buy the filters in 77mm size and then get step rings for all the rest of my lenses. Does that sound right or is there a better way to go about it? Currently my biggest lens is 77mm. Down the road I may be picking up a Canon 24-70 L and it looks like that takes a 77 as well so I think I'll be good there.

[outabounds]

Most people I know using GNDs don't use the screw on kind. You might want a CPL, too.

[hitek79]

http://www.leefilters.com/index.php/camera/index

Check that page out. This is what a lot of photographers use. I personally hand hold most of my filters, but a holder is nice to have for longer exposures.

[splitter]

I think a CPL is more important that all of those for the sorts of things people tend to shoot on this site.

For those, I would get a card type filter with holders. Then you'll only need the adapter for other lenses. As outabounds mentioned, for a GND and reverse GND you want to be able to move the demarcation line depending on horizon/composition. An ND would be okay as a screw-on, but it won't work with every lens. My ND is a screw on, but that limits it to my 16-85 and it doesn't see any use on the 11-16. Which is okay because that guy is so wide it tends to vignette with filters.

The CPL is/should be a screw on. I'm not sure if they make them the other way.

[Chainsaw_Willie]

I would definitely buy the CPL for your lens with the biggest filter threads and then just use adapters on the other lenses. I bought a $$$ Singh-Ray CPL for 77mm thread size back when I owned a lens with 77mm threads. I've since sold that lens and now use it on a lens with a 67mm thread using an adapter. An advantage of doing this is less vignetting if the lens is a wid-angle (as mine is, 16mm).

For the ND/grad. NDs, get one of the Lee filter holders, but also get that for the largest 77mm size and then you can just leave the adapters on the other lenses (you'll have to buy 77mm lens caps for all of them, but they're cheap). Those filter holders can definitely get themselves into the picture depending on how they're angled and how wide the lens is.

I too hand-hold the grad NDs quite a bit, but there are definitely times when using a tripod and longer exposures when you're not going to want to do that.

[dfinn]

Does anything think the CPL is less valuable than maybe it used to be? I shoot in raw and the gradient tool in ACR seems to work pretty well. Just thinking out loud here..


The ND filters allow some things that can't be done in post, like water blurring. I also could use them for shooting video in the snow during the day.

[Fuzz]

Does anything think the CPL is less valuable than maybe it used to be? I shoot in raw and the gradient tool in ACR seems to work pretty well. Just thinking out loud here.

While the gradient tool can help, it doesn't come close to what a CPL can do under the right conditions. I shot this with a CPL and very little PP (no saturation bump). There is no way I could have gotten that look by PP. Plus the other benefit of a CPL is to cut out glare, which cannot be done in PP either. I shot this when the water was almost completely white with glare -- but with the CPL it turned completely transparent.

[Lonnie]

Does anything think the CPL is less valuable than maybe it used to be? I shoot in raw and the gradient tool in ACR seems to work pretty well. Just thinking out loud here..


The ND filters allow some things that can't be done in post, like water blurring. I also could use them for shooting video in the snow during the day.

While the gradient tool can help, it doesn't come close to what a CPL can do under the right conditions. I shot this with a CPL and very little PP (no saturation bump). There is no way I could have gotten that look by PP. Plus the other benefit of a CPL is to cut out glare, which cannot be done in PP either. I shot this when the water was almost completely white with glare -- but with the CPL it turned completely transparent.

It's like trying to decide if the corkscrew or the bottle opener is the most valuable tool on your swiss army knife. The correct answer is "It depends on your personal style."

[Chainsaw_Willie]

I gotta agree with Fuzz. A CPL can do things you simply cannot accomplish in post. Most notably cutting glare on water. There's a reason fishermen like polarized sunglasses - you can see down into the water on a sunny day.

They are also really good at cutting through atmospheric haze. You can make haze look better with processing but you'll never get the same results as what a CP can deliver.

Finally, they boost saturation/contrast in a wide variety of conditions. Again, you can accomplish this to a degree in post, but it's not the same.