ND Filter quality

I have just read the instruction leaflet that comes with it. To be honest I thought it was just a label until I read a post above and realised it opens out and has instructions on the inside. Interestingly it states that vignetting starts at about 11mm on a APS-C and 18.5mm on full frame.

More interestingly it gives more information on the scale saying that the min (0 on my scale) is ND2, 3 on my scale is about ND4, ND8 is between 5 and 6 and 8 is ND400. It then states that you should stop at about two marks before max with wideangle lenses, highlighting the crossing. The example pictures shown are 24mm (doesn't say if cropped or not) and the problem appears somewhere around 8 on my scale BUT they are portrait examples which might have an effect.

I am not sure if the ND figures they quote are correct. As I'm a beginner, perhaps someone could check this from the exif data on my pictures for me or suggest a simple test. I shot in aperture priority at f8 with evaluative metering. Is this ok or should I have used spot metering and manual mode to check this accurately?

It wouldn't be too much of an effort for me to check this aspect again as only one set of photos would be needed.

Cheers

Dan

Edited as just checked the ND scale and realised ND8 is 3 stops so it looks like it works up to 3 stops at 11mm but I'm not sure it's giving ND400 or about 9 stops as early as suggested. Mine also seems to start at around 2 stops not 1.
 
Instructions.jpg
 
Yep.........this is the instruction leaflet I was talking about. I'm not sure if it is 9 stops where it says ND400...........I thought this Fader was only a 2 to 8 stop fader........but maybe I was mislead. Thinking about it........when you turn it close to the MAX end, it does get REALLY dark......to the point where you can't even see anything almost, so possibly it is. At ultra wide angles though, it is definitely unusable at that end, which is why i've decided to buy the Lightcraft 9 stop ND, it seems like they could be a good pair that will cover the whole range needed.
 
A couple of points about the instructions....

- For one thing you don't get to see them until you have already bought the product.

- The term "wide angle lens" is pretty loose. They were very precise about the point at which vignetting occurs, so why not be more clear about what a "wide angle lens" is?

- The problem I have experienced and also seen in your photos, Dan, is not vignetting. For one thing, I did not go shorter than 24mm. For another, vignetting should affect all corners equally. The effect we have observed seems universally to have more impact on the top left and bottom right corners of the frame.

- As for the precision with which the markers correspond to stops, the markers have no meaning at all. At the bright end a large rotation has a small impact. At the dark end of the scale a tiny rotation can have a huge impact. That means that stopping two markers short of Max is falling a long way short of achieving the advertised 8 stop performance.


If you want to work precisely in stops then I suggest that without the filter fitted you set up a manual exposure for your scene, picking a shutter speed of exactly 1/250. Use whatever combination of aperture and ISO will allow 1/250. You could use Live View, if you wish, to monitor your exposure accuracy. Take a shot.

Now reduce your shutter speed to 1/60, which is 2 stops slower than a/250, and carefully turn the filter until a correct exposure is restored once again. At that point you will have an accurate 2 stop density dialed in on the filter. I would pay no attention to the markers on the filter. Use only the results you see in the camera's Live View display. The histogram may help too, especially if you have a plain scene such as a white wall. Take the shot.

Drop the shutter speed to 1/30 and adjust the filter again for a correct exposure and take the shot. That will be 3 stops of density. Take the shot.

Repeat that procedure for....

1/15 for 4 stops of density;
1/8 for 5 stops of density;
1/4 for 6 stops of density;
1/2 for 7 stops of density;
1 second for 8 stops of density.

If you can't achieve good IQ at 8 stops, or any other density come to that, then in my opinion the filter is not fit for purpose.
 
Nice set of tests by Dan, I only just noticed them! It looks like the filter is usable at 55mm all the way through the range, with slight signs of this darkening at MAX......granted that most people want to use these at ultra wide angles but there are many situations where a wider angle is not necessarily better for landscape shots anyway. Deeming the filter not fit for purpose because it doesn't work as well at wider angles is probably a bit unfair, because it isn't advertised as being a wide angle ND filter....there may be people who use this filter on telephoto focal lengths of 70mm and above, who may never encounter these problems at all.

The filter is definitely far from perfect, but for people who don't only take shots at ultra wide angle, and want a variable ND, it is an "okay" solution. I think I will keep it to use when I either want to use at slightly longer focal lengths or only want a 2-6 stops in light reduction. When I want to use my UWA lens or require a lot of light reduction, I will just change to the Lightcraft 9-stop ND.
 
Currently I think my opinion sits somewhere between Allen's and Tim's. I bought it to use with my 11-16, realising that there might be minor issues at 11 but having read that the wide angle issues with the Mark 1 version had been resolved. I also have a 17-55 and had expected to at least be able to use it over it's full range and the lens's full range with this. Both are 77mm. I now need to think whether it's still worth having for what I want to do and I think I need to do a few more checks along the lines of Tim's suggestions and with the 11-16 much closer to the wall to reduce shadows and improve consistency.

The problem is I just received an I1 Pro (new from ebay) which I am having some issues with and will have to learn how to use if I keep it and should be concentrating on work!
 
All I ask is for fair warning of the limitations of the filter in the marketing material so that people are fully aware before wasting their time purchasing and testing a product that is plainly not suited to use in one of the most common scenarios one would imagine.

While it doesn't say it is intended for wide angle lenses, it doesn't say it is not. How is the customer supposed to know? ND filters and wide angle lenses go together like ducks and water. Why wouldn't I expect it to work at the full advertised range of 2-8 stops? Why wouldn't I be shocked/annoyed to find it is hopeless for such use?

If I had known in advance that this filter was unsuited to use on a 24mm lens, or even a 35mm lens, and unable to deliver adequate IQ at 8 stops, or anywhere close, I could have saved a lot of wasted effort. And the point is it's not just me. Until something is done by the marketeers to make these limitations known I am sure that many others will waste their time too.
 
You do have a point..........to be honest, I am also quite annoyed that it doesn't work at wide angles, as it did set us back a good £90 which imo isn't cheap.....especially if it doesn't work to its full specification as you intended it to. I guess I'm just trying to justify keeping it because it isn't COMPLETELY useless.....

hmmm......now I'm tempted to return it and go for square filters.....decisions!
 
Just some more comments really :)

Not sure why format should make any difference. It's an angle of view thing. If anything, it could be argued it's worse on crop format because the depth of field is greater, f/number for f/number, pulling the cross into sharper focus, but I think that's moot.

The position of the cross in the frame depends on the position of rotation, it doesn't always run corner to corner. Actually it's not a cross, but two boomerang-shaped curves. They are always present to some extent but as the degree of darkening is increased they become darker and move closer together forming a cross. Tim's sequence on page one shows it, but to see it clearly you need to shoot a plain, light subject - a wall or ceiling. I think it's a moire pattern, as the two polarising screens clash.

It doesn't show up so clearly on longer focal lengths because the longer the lens, the smaller section of the filter the lens is looking through - basically you only see part of it. And there is much less depth of field which smooths out the whole thing. You will always get a patchy result of some sort though, which may or may not be acceptable. I found that a lot depends on the subject - sometimes you can hardly see it, then at other times, when there an area of clear sky for example, it's terrible.

It is obviously intended for wide angle use, which is why it has that conical design that clears mechanical vignetting on my 17mm lens on full frame, and presumably should be okay at 10mm or so on crop format.

BTW, eight stops of ND is x256, nine stops x512 and ten stops x1024.

Mine went back yesterday, which is a real shame. However, I'm more than happy with the fixed nine-stop LightCraft ND500 mentioned above. It's the best dark ND I've tried, and by far the cheapest. My B+W ten-stopper will be in the for sale section shortly, so that's a happy ending for me :)

Edit: SinghRay make a similar variable ND filter - it costs $390 :eek: I don't like SinghRay and the nonsense/rubbish/lies/marketing speak they come up with to justify their silly prices. Here's how they describe their Vari-ND "As you become familiar with using your Vari-ND Filter, you'll find the visual effects you create will vary with the focal length of each lens you're using, the direction in which your subjects move, the speed of their motion and, of course, the duration of the exposures. With so many variables, it's no wonder you'll often find the results of your initial experiments and testing to be not only surprising but visually exciting." That's complete crap, from here http://www.singh-ray.com/varind.html
 
First of all, I think I owe you all something of an apology. I’m massively disappointed that the Fader MkII isn’t as perfect as I’d hoped it would be – and I’m sorry I personally didn’t do more testing before allowing them to be posted out last week. The only lens with a 77mm filter thread I own is an 80-400mm – which, unsurprisingly, showed no problems whatsoever …hence I was happy to release the filters when they arrived at the end of last week.

Tim’s points about there not being warnings about the limitations prior to purchase are dead right. I’ve now changed the descriptions on our site to try and explain the limitations in the best way I can. I’m also in the process of writing a new set of instructions – the instructions in there at the moment are provided by the manufacturer, and in my opinion, should be considerably more comprehensive and informative than they are.

Having had a chat with both Tim and Richard, and exchanged emails with Phil, I’ve been spending a fair bit of time playing with the Fader MkII on non-telephoto lenses – and I‘m finding the same limitations as you. Here’s my take on it…

The dark cross / shadow issue definitely seems to be directly related to the focal length. What I’m finding with my D300S seems comparable to what Allen’s finding with a 40D, and Dan’s found with his 50D. The problem seems to be more severe on full frame cameras such as the 5D2 that Richard and Tim have been using - leading me to the conclusion that the useable range of the filter is more restricted on full-frame cameras than on cropped bodies.

Based on the tests I’ve done (which I did earlier this week, and pretty much duplicate what Dan did yesterday) I’ve drawn up a table of what seem to be the useable range of the filter at different focal lengths. I will need to do this in a more scientific way in a controlled environment at some point – and also with a full frame body. Obviously all this should really have been done by LCW – but in the absence of this information from the manufacturer, here’re my findings from my cropped body (D300S):

12mm: 2 stop (ND4) – 3 stop (ND8) operating range.
15mm: 2 stop (ND4) – 4 stop (ND16) operating range.
18mm: 2 stop (ND4) – 5 stop (ND32) operating range.
24mm: 2 stop (ND4) – 6 stop (ND64) operating range.
35mm: 2 stop (ND4) – 7 stop (ND125) operating range.
40mm: 2 stop (ND4) – 7.5 stop (ND175) operating range.
50mm: 2 stop (ND4) – 8 stop (ND250) operating range
70mm: 2 stop (ND4) – 8.5 stop (ND350) operating range.
100mm: 2 stop (ND4) – 9 stop (ND500) operating range.

I’ve also done the same as Richard, and tried creating a makeshift fader filter by using two polarising filters – and the dark cross issue rears its ugly head again at high densities. I’ve struggled to test my makeshift version at wide angles, as it vignettes horrifically. I guess that could explain why Singh Ray haven’t bothered trying to slim down the frame – you get rid of the vignetting and the dark cross becomes a bigger issue. Having just had a look at their website, it does refer to “irregularities” on wide angle lenses and high densities – I guess I now understand what they’re referring to…

It goes without saying that anyone on here who decides it is not for them will get a complete refund.

My apologies once again,
Andy
 
Thanks for the response. It's good to know you are concerned about your customers. I just need to have a good think about whether it's worth me keeping or not which I'm struggling to get time to do for the next few days. Being new to it all it takes me a lot longer to work things out! I should have made my mind up by the end of the weekend.

Dan
 
Andy, I really appreciate you posting here and I commend Premier Ink for the approach taken to handling this matter. I feel really bad for you guys that the filter is not up to the job claimed. I would much rather have a working filter, but there was no way I could accept paying £90 for a product that fell so short of the advertised claims.

Your service has been exemplary and I shall be sure to put Premier Ink at the top of my list of suppliers the next time I am shopping.

Regards,
Tim.
 
tdodd said:
Andy, I really appreciate you posting here and I commend Premier Ink for the approach taken to handling this matter. I feel really bad for you guys that the filter is not up to the job claimed. I would much rather have a working filter, but there was no way I could accept paying £90 for a product that fell so short of the advertised claims.

Your service has been exemplary and I shall be sure to put Premier Ink at the top of my list of suppliers the next time I am shopping.

Regards,
Tim.
Click to expand...

Well said Tim :agree:

I've have spoken to Andy at some length about this and agree that Premier Ink have acted extremely well throughout.

I have also bought several items from them now and both their prices and service are first rate. Recommended :thumbs:
 
Dan1502 said:
Thanks for the response. It's good to know you are concerned about your customers. I just need to have a good think about whether it's worth me keeping or not which I'm struggling to get time to do for the next few days. Being new to it all it takes me a lot longer to work things out! I should have made my mind up by the end of the weekend.

Dan
Click to expand...

There's no time limit on returning these - days, weeks, months - you'll still get a full refund.

The simple fact is that the filters don't do everything they were advertised as doing when you bought them - so people have a right to be disappointed - not least me!!

That said, I'll still be pressing ahead with stocking them - but with an explanation of their limitations on the website so people are aware of what they can and can't do before they buy them. I think they have a place, and are a clever and useful tool - but not for wide angle stuff, which is a real, real shame.

I'm not going to have internet access for the next three days, so please don't think I'm ignoring anyone if you try contacting me - I'll try and answer any queries, if anyone has any, on Monday.

Andy
 
I can only echo the comments from Tim and Richard !!

We know that we cannot get things 100% right, 100% of the time..... and its all about how we deal with the times that it doesn't hit the mark....

Great customer service.....


Phil
Every Little Helps....!
 
Another :thumbs: from me for Andy/Premier Ink's response, it is definitely nice to see that you are concerned about customers and the quality of your products. Glad to see your testing results as well, as it gives me a good idea of its limitations, and the fact that you are willing to take it back for a full refund at any time is fantastic. I've ordered the fixed 9-stop ND which I should hopefully receive soon, if I feel this is enough I may return the Fader otherwise I will probably just keep both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top