Reading mode: Light Dark

Talking ND filters 4x or 8x for waterfalls???

Go to last post
U

UtahManSir

Senior Member
Messages
4,660
Reaction score
169
Location
South Jordan, UT, US
Having recently bought my long desired Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6, I am now ready to get filters, I have picked out a CPL, and I also want to get a ND for waterfalls. (Not into split/graduated ND's etc... just talking about a ND that is the same amount for the whole filter)

For those of you who have used them for waterfalls (my prime desire to get one is for this purpose) do you find 4x is sufficient to get the really creamy water look? Or do you need 8x?

I could stack the 4x with the CPL and get close to a 6x but may get vignetting on the 10-20 at the widest setting.

Please share your wisdom!!

Thanks,

Lloyd
--

“For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean and wrong.” Henry Louis Mencken

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/
http://lloydshell.zenfolio.com/
 
make of this what you will
but i use a 8x ( 3 stop or .9) filter on the 15ltd
examples here
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=34011639

most of these are at around 1/2 sec handheld ( and still stopped down well into diffraction territory f20-22 a lot) exif should be embedded if that helps

with the 10-20 from my own experience anything past about .3 sec (1/2 is doable occasionally maybe 1-2 from 5) is pushing handhold-ableness to the limit.

Rohan (hopefully something's useful)
--
I hear birds out the window, quick i must grab my camera.
http://floatycod.zenfolio.com/
 
Or you could make use of the multi exposure function of the camera. Tick the Auto Ev Adjust. It will calculate the correct exposure for the combined shots.
 
Firstley i,d like to say I,m not an expert on photography stilling learning.
I had the desire to shoot waterfalls and had the same question as u.
So I bought a cheap set set from ebay from Citiwide.A cpf,nd4 and nd 8 for
$aus25 for the 3.

I went to my local railway station where fortunatley for me there is a garden on an embankment with a water feature.

The first day was in full sunlight I had to put all 3 on to get a maximin of 2 sec. shutter a f22.the shots were ok but lots of shsdows and not that creamy effect.
Next day no sun, no wind, The cpf and the nd8 I could get up to 10 sec at f22
no showdows.
I have now purchased a Hoya pro1 cpf and a Hoya hmc nd8

The shots below are ok but the filters are dirt cheap.This might give an idea
f18 6sec mirror up tripod k7 pentax 16-50
--



f22 8 sec



 
I prefer to shoot waterfalls and streams on cloudy days. Thus, a low ISO and polarized filter are usually enough to allow a long exposure if you're looking for that creamy water look.

If you're needing an 8x ND filter then it's probably a bright sunny day which doesn't work well for waterfall shots. Too many contrasty shadows, glare, and washed out colors.

But occasionally a 2x or 4x filter might be necessary.

I wouldn't worry too much about a little vignetting when stacking a couple filters. Any vignetting I've ever encountered has been easily removed with a photo editor.

Everyone of these waterfall and stream photos were taken using only a polarized filter and low ISO:

http://sevenarrowphotos.zenfolio.com/p797703874
UtahManSir said:
Having recently bought my long desired Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6, I am now ready to get filters, I have picked out a CPL, and I also want to get a ND for waterfalls. (Not into split/graduated ND's etc... just talking about a ND that is the same amount for the whole filter)

For those of you who have used them for waterfalls (my prime desire to get one is for this purpose) do you find 4x is sufficient to get the really creamy water look? Or do you need 8x?

I could stack the 4x with the CPL and get close to a 6x but may get vignetting on the 10-20 at the widest setting.
Click to expand...
--
Allan in Colorado, USA
 
thecodthemullet said:
make of this what you will
but i use a 8x ( 3 stop or .9) filter on the 15ltd
examples here
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=34011639
Click to expand...
Saw those when you posted them, Looking more for 3-5 sec exposures on a Tripod.
thecodthemullet said:
with the 10-20 from my own experience anything past about .3 sec (1/2 is doable occasionally maybe 1-2 from 5) is pushing handhold-ableness to the limit.
Click to expand...
I have hand held at 1/3 with my Sigma 17-70, at f22, again well into diffraction territory:



Hoping to go back to the same area with a tripod and only go to f16 or f11 and get a 1-2 second exposure.

thanks for looking.

Lloyd

--

“For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean and wrong.” Henry Louis Mencken

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/
http://lloydshell.zenfolio.com/
 
sbc said:
Or you could make use of the multi exposure function of the camera. Tick the Auto Ev Adjust. It will calculate the correct exposure for the combined shots.
Click to expand...
If I had a K10 than I could, that is only one of two things that I feel my K200d lacks to be the perfect camera.

Had I my Tripod the first time I could have taken multiple exposures and blended them, which is always an idea to try, but I want to get it right in camera if I can.

Thanks for the suggestions!

Lloyd

--

“For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean and wrong.” Henry Louis Mencken

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/
http://lloydshell.zenfolio.com/
 
aplucini said:
I prefer to shoot waterfalls and streams on cloudy days. Thus, a low ISO and polarized filter are usually enough to allow a long exposure if you're looking for that creamy water look.

If you're needing an 8x ND filter then it's probably a bright sunny day which doesn't work well for waterfall shots. Too many contrasty shadows, glare, and washed out colors.

But occasionally a 2x or 4x filter might be necessary.

I wouldn't worry too much about a little vignetting when stacking a couple filters. Any vignetting I've ever encountered has been easily removed with a photo editor.

Everyone of these waterfall and stream photos were taken using only a polarized filter and low ISO:
Click to expand...
Thanks Al,

I try to not do them on Sunny Days, but sometimes you have to shoot when you are there... sigh.....

See my shot in an earlier post of Lower Calf Creek Falls, I was stopping all the way down to get 1/3 of a Sec. If I had a CPL or ND I could have gone slower, and would have made it worth it to borrow my brothers Monopod and try to improvise a steadier hold.

Hoping to do both Upper and Lower Calf Creek this summer and a few other waterfalls around. There aren't many in Utah, but there are a few!

Thanks for looking in!

Lloyd
--

“For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean and wrong.” Henry Louis Mencken

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/
http://lloydshell.zenfolio.com/
 
Hi Lloyd,

I don't know much about filters but I did run acroos this Dolica CF-NDK77 77mm 0.3, 0.6, 0.9ND Neutral Density Filter Kit for $63 from Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/Dolica-CF-NDK77-Neutral-Density-Filter/dp/B001M5RHDA/ref=dp_return_1?ie=UTF8&n=502394&s=photo

Cheers.

--
Ron - 'We don't have time to go take pics this afternoon Carl.'
Carl - 'What do you mean? It will only take 1/1000s.'

'Keep your eyes looking forward. However, glance back now and then to see where you've come from. It will put a smile on your face.' ~ brandrx

Ron ~ Retired.
 
UtahManSir said:
I could stack the 4x with the CPL and get close to a 6x but may get vignetting on the 10-20 at the widest setting.
Click to expand...
I thought I would see what happens with a couple of Kenko Pro1D filters. I bought the Kenko Pro1D filters for the slim design and the front threads. There may be better filters out there, but none that I know of that are designed for wide lenses and have the front threads.

Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 at 10mm without filters





Camera: Pentax K20D
Exposure: 1/125
Aperture: f/8.0
Focal Length: 10 mm
ISO: 100mm
Lens Sigma 10-20mm
Metz 48 AF-1: manual at 1/64

Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 at 10mm with Kenko Pro1D CPL and Kenko Pro1D 8x ND





Camera: Pentax K20D
Exposure: 1/125
Aperture: f/8.0
Focal Length: 10 mm
ISO: 100mm
Lens Sigma 10-20mm
Metz 48 AF-1: manual at 1/2

Thank you
Russell

--
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/do_i_know_you/
 
i'd go straight to a ND8 filter.
Why?

because its harder to slow the shutter speed down without going to F16 or greater.

at least with an ND8 I set ISO 100, f8 and check the shutter speed. Generally its slow enough, if its too slow, i up the iso to 200 or 400.

If you get an ND2 or ND4 filter and it doesn't slow it down, then you'll have to go to f22 or something and thats not great.

--
Justin
--------------------------------------------------------
Photobucket
http://s107.photobucket.com/albums/m313/justin-23/
 
You really only need to get to 1 second or so to get a good bridal veil shot of a waterfall. You'll probably get that on an overcast day (also essential) at F16-F18 with just a CPL.

I've tried an ND8 (Cokin P series) with a PRO-1D Kenko CPL - but the vignetting on the 16-50 lens was pretty bad.

I tend to combine shots myself - either using multi-exposure or HDR techniques. For example - the Hopetoun Falls pano was shot with the DA*16-50 and CPL, 2 stop exposure bracketted and combined to HDR in Photomatix basic. The resultant tiffs were then combined as a pano in PTGui. A lot of work but worth the effort.

--
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/jamesverhoeven
http://community.webshots.com/user/jimbob_productions
 
Thanks for the test shots! The Kenko tested exactly the same as the Marumi on this test: http://www.lenstip.com/115.1-article-Polarizing_filters_test.html

and they have threads on the front too!

I do find myself wondering about stacking a ND on top of the CPL if I need to, but I think with these thinner ones I should be fine! Apprciate your efforts!

Lloyd
--

“For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean and wrong.” Henry Louis Mencken

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/
http://lloydshell.zenfolio.com/
 
justin23 said:
i'd go straight to a ND8 filter.
Why?

because its harder to slow the shutter speed down without going to F16 or greater.

at least with an ND8 I set ISO 100, f8 and check the shutter speed. Generally its slow enough, if its too slow, i up the iso to 200 or 400.

If you get an ND2 or ND4 filter and it doesn't slow it down, then you'll have to go to f22 or something and thats not great.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly!

Lloyd
--

“For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean and wrong.” Henry Louis Mencken

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/
http://lloydshell.zenfolio.com/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top