ND Filter vs HSS

[Travis Burnside]

I know this is the studio forum, and I'm a studio guy, but occasionally I'd like to come out of the cave. I finally have HSS-capable gear and I'm curious about a couple things. (They're AD400 Pros, not "overpower the sun" gear, but hopefully will be fine for the kind of things I have in mind.)

In the past when I wanted to shoot open in bright sun, I'd just use an ND filter to keep shutter speed under sync. With HSS as an option, now I don't need to do that. I understand that HSS eats quite a lot of power. But of course, an ND filter also eats power.

Roughly speaking, would any conditions point to using one option over the other if you have both?

 

[fotowbert]

I know this is the studio forum, and I'm a studio guy, but occasionally I'd like to come out of the cave. I finally have HSS-capable gear and I'm curious about a couple things. (They're AD400 Pros, not "overpower the sun" gear, but hopefully will be fine for the kind of things I have in mind.)

In the past when I wanted to shoot open in bright sun, I'd just use an ND filter to keep shutter speed under sync. With HSS as an option, now I don't need to do that. I understand that HSS eats quite a lot of power. But of course, an ND filter also eats power.

Roughly speaking, would any conditions point to using one option over the other if you have both?

Flash metering is one consideration. If you intend to do flash metering HSS flash requires the $$$ Sekonic L-858 model meter. The X sync flash used with ND filter can be measured by most any flash meter.

John

 

[Belle04]

I know this is the studio forum, and I'm a studio guy, but occasionally I'd like to come out of the cave. I finally have HSS-capable gear and I'm curious about a couple things. (They're AD400 Pros, not "overpower the sun" gear, but hopefully will be fine for the kind of things I have in mind.)

In the past when I wanted to shoot open in bright sun, I'd just use an ND filter to keep shutter speed under sync. With HSS as an option, now I don't need to do that. I understand that HSS eats quite a lot of power. But of course, an ND filter also eats power.

Roughly speaking, would any conditions point to using one option over the other if you have both?

As other user mentioned, if you want to meter your light (for what ever reason) then non-HSS is what you can meter, with the exception of the specific Sektonic meter they mentioned.

If outside and you want to freeze motion, you may want to have a higher shutter speed. This is a good use case for HSS. Remember while in studio the flash duration is responsible for freezing the action because ambient is not impacting the frame. When outdoors and ambient is impacting the frame, the shutter speed very much comes into play.

Sure if it's just a pretty girl posing, then 1/200 or what ever your sync speed is probably fine, but what if someone is running or biking?

Also you seem to not understand the power loss from HSS. Just by enabling HSS, you loose about 1 to 2 stops depending on the brand and model.

To give you an example.
Say you had a sync speed of 1/200 and your settings were HSS 1/1 power, 1/800 SS. Compare that to 1/200 with a 2 stop ND regular sync, you could set your strobe at 1/2 to 1/4 power depending on the exact inefficiency of your strobe.

 

[Travis Burnside]

Also you seem to not understand the power loss from HSS. Just by enabling HSS, you loose about 1 to 2 stops depending on the brand and model.

To give you an example.
Say you had a sync speed of 1/200 and your settings were HSS 1/1 power, 1/800 SS. Compare that to 1/200 with a 2 stop ND regular sync, you could set your strobe at 1/2 to 1/4 power depending on the exact inefficiency of your strobe.

Thanks for the feedback. I wrote:

"I understand that HSS eats quite a lot of power. But of course, an ND filter also eats power."

Not sure where the confusion is here. I was more looking for feedback / ideas on why one would choose one over the other, which several people including yourself have provided.

Thanks.

 

[tugwilson]

The main advantage of HSS is that it's (in theory) trivial to use. The disadvantages are that you immediately lose 1-2 stops from your 1/1 power, you probably get colour temp variations and it stresses your lights so overheat protection cuts in early.

The disadvantage of ND filters is that you can't get a fast shutter speed to freeze action if ambient is a significant proportion of the light falling on the subject.

Of course the best way of addressing a problem is not to have it in the first place. That involves using a camera which has a very high sync speed. i.e. ones that have leaf shutters like my Fuji X100 and GFX100RF. However they have the limitation having fixes focal length lenses.

 

[Belle04]

Also you seem to not understand the power loss from HSS. Just by enabling HSS, you loose about 1 to 2 stops depending on the brand and model.

To give you an example.
Say you had a sync speed of 1/200 and your settings were HSS 1/1 power, 1/800 SS. Compare that to 1/200 with a 2 stop ND regular sync, you could set your strobe at 1/2 to 1/4 power depending on the exact inefficiency of your strobe.

Thanks for the feedback. I wrote:

"I understand that HSS eats quite a lot of power. But of course, an ND filter also eats power."

Not sure where the confusion is here. I was more looking for feedback / ideas on why one would choose one over the other, which several people including yourself have provided.

When shooting with HSS, the light is proportional to the shutter speed. If your shutter speed is twice as fast, you loose half the amount of light, all other things being equal.

If you use an ND filter, the power loss from the ND filter is the same as what you would loose from changing the shutter, however, just by being in HSS, you loose power.

So in all situations where you can choose between an ND and HSS, an ND will give you more power to work with. How much more depends on the make and model of the specific strobe.

Reading between the lines, this may be important because you may be able to get away using an AD200 (for example) where you would need a AD600 using HSS. So, spoon feeding here, an ND filter can make for a more portable and lightweight setup when shooting outdoors.

If you:

• hardly ever shoot outdoors and
• don't have a suitable ND (a fixed may not be good enough to get you under your sync speed) or you just don't want to use one for personal reasons
• and you don't need to freeze motion only possible by a higher shutter speed
  then just use HSS
• and you are not running into power limitations of your strobes
• and you don't care how big the strobe you have with you (or you don't have a smaller strobe to use)

then use HSS.

 

[rumple]

I understand that HSS eats quite a lot of power. But of course, an ND filter also eats power.

ND filters do not eat power, see below in my standard blurb:

High-Speed Sync (HSS) is less efficient than neutral density (ND) filters because much of the flash's power is wasted on the shutter curtains, reducing the light reaching the sensor. This requires the flash to be closer to the subject, sometimes impractically so. With ND filters, you set the camera to its x-sync speed, adjust the flash to overpower the sun if needed, and shoot.

A common misconception is that ND filters make it harder to overpower the sun because they reduce flash power. In reality, ND filters reduce both flash and ambient light equally. If your flash can overpower the sun at f/11, using an ND filter simply requires opening the aperture to compensate, maintaining the same flash power.

For more on HSS inefficiency, see:
- Improving Flash Efficiency with ND Filters http://betterfamilyphotos.blogspot.com/2010/05/improving-flash-efficiency-with-nd.html
- High-Speed Flash Sync http://neilvn.com/tangents/high-speed-flash-sync/

I can overpower the sun with a single bare SB-5000 flash, but I prefer using two for reduced strain, extended range, and faster recycling. My DSLR gear, with fast lenses and bright viewfinders, handled up to five stops of ND filters well. Consumer gear with slower lenses and dimmer viewfinders may struggle beyond two stops. Five stops is my maximum recommendation. With mirrorless cameras, ND filters don’t affect composing since the electronic viewfinder (EVF) compensates by brightening the image.

When shooting at f/1.4 in bright sunlight with flash as the key light and ambient light underexposed, HSS or HyperSync becomes useful. For example, underexposing ambient light might require f/22. Using ISO 50 brings it to f/16, and an x-sync speed of 1/200 brings it to f/11. A five-stop ND filter gets you to f/2. For f/1.4, you’d need HSS, HyperSync, a shaded area, or a six-stop ND filter. Otherwise, ND filters are more efficient for flash photography.

HSS eliminates the need for ND filters, which is convenient. Some prefer HSS, believing higher shutter speeds better freeze motion (a separate topic). However, if you already own ND filters, they can be more cost-effective, as HSS-capable flashes are typically more expensive than non-HSS flashes.

 

[rumple]

If you use an ND filter, the power loss from the ND filter

As in my above blurb, ND filters do not have "power loss". There is no loss of range, unlike HSS.

--
"THINK" - Watson

 

[rumple]

Roughly speaking, would any conditions point to using one option over the other if you have both?

For dynamic subjects when you don't have time to adjust ND filters, I would use HSS. For more static subjects, ND filter - more range and less hard on the flash.

 

[Ellis Vener]

I choose an ND filter when I want to knock down the effect the ambient light level will have on the exposure by three stops and have enough flash power after taking into account the light’s placement relative to subject and modifier/shape.



At a minimum, HSS sync modes restrict the amount of electricity ionizing the xenon in the flashtube to a quarter of any size of any model of an electronic flash’s maximum output.



Using the user-tunable Sync View option with a FusionTLC Raven transmitter helps a lot, but in my experience its practical benefit is limited to a maximum shutter speed of 1/800th second.

i haven’t shot with the Sony A9II so I can’t comment about its short short shutter speed feature.

 

[Travis Burnside]

Of course the best way of addressing a problem is not to have it in the first place. That involves using a camera which has a very high sync speed. i.e. ones that have leaf shutters like my Fuji X100 and GFX100RF. However they have the limitation having fixes focal length lenses.

Now I don't need any help with my GAS...

 

[Travis Burnside]

Extremely helpful. Thanks.

 

[Chimping Aberratation]

In reality, ND filters often make it harder to take photos (they darken the viewfinder image, affect autofocus, and can introduce a color shift). I still use them most of the time, as not all camera and flash combinations support HSS, and HSS consumes too much flash power. It also makes it harder to calculate effective power and battery capacity, since you need to account for the power output loss when HSS is enabled.

 

[Belle04]

they darken the viewfinder image, affect autofocus, and can introduce a color shift).

Are you sure about that? Maybe in DSLR days with OVF but with mirrorless it's not an issue. Color shift is obviously tied with the specific ND you use>

 

[rumple]

they darken the viewfinder image, affect autofocus[...]

Are you sure about that? Maybe in DSLR days with OVF but with mirrorless it's not an issue. [...]

Also, regarding focus, NDs are (almost) only used in very bright light, so autofocus is still good.

 

[msstudio]

I'm doing this for a while, and all the Pocket Wizard, HSS etc, never really did for me. I prefer to shoot under the X-sync and be able to adjust the strobe contribution to the image linear. I guess thats why I'm a fan of Hasselblad today. ND filters are fine, but current digital cameras allow for low SO shooting that accommodate most situations.

 

[Lucky Buddha]

To me, there is always tradeoffs to where people say ~~ No such thing as a free lunch~~ I am in the ND filter crowd , since I have studio strobes to overpower ambient light.. Now if you use a strobe with an action/ fast duration tubes. That 1/2000 flash duration is now the shutter speed since the flash is already came and went. And the ND filter cuts the ambient light to where the strobe is lighting what you want to light.

For example, I set the Canon Rebel to 1/100 shutter speed, and the flash is making 1/2000 duration, so I would get a crisp flash image despite the camera 1/100 SS because the scene is dark without the flash. I was doing this with roller derby ; where the venue is ready dark and the girls are wizzing by.. I used Elinchrom strobes with the Rapide tubes and some Speedotron equipment as well, If I used a pair of Speedotron head connected to one pack, I can get 1/2000 durations at 600WS since the pair of heads is draining the caps at an equal rate.

 

[BenLZW]

To me, there is always tradeoffs to where people say ~~ No such thing as a free lunch~~ I am in the ND filter crowd , since I have studio strobes to overpower ambient light.. Now if you use a strobe with an action/ fast duration tubes. That 1/2000 flash duration is now the shutter speed since the flash is already came and went. And the ND filter cuts the ambient light to where the strobe is lighting what you want to light.
For example, I set the Canon Rebel to 1/100 shutter speed, and the flash is making 1/2000 duration, so I would get a crisp flash image despite the camera 1/100 SS because the scene is dark without the flash. I was doing this with roller derby ; where the venue is ready dark and the girls are wizzing by.. I used Elinchrom strobes with the Rapide tubes and some Speedotron equipment as well, If I used a pair of Speedotron head connected to one pack, I can get 1/2000 durations at 600WS since the pair of heads is draining the caps at an equal rate.

I have a few older Elinchrom Ranger RX Speed 1,100 WS battery packs with Standard heads. I can get 1/8000 shutter speed and still gain full frame flash. So for HS (HiSync) Elinchrom-wise Shutter speed regulates ambient and aperture handles flash. So tune these to taste.

 

[Chimping Aberratation]

they darken the viewfinder image, affect autofocus, and can introduce a color shift).

Are you sure about that? Maybe in DSLR days with OVF but with mirrorless it's not an issue. Color shift is obviously tied with the specific ND you use>

Absolutely sure. You can test it yourself with a strong ND or variable ND filter. The lack of light passing through the lens also makes it much harder for mirrorless cameras to focus. You might not notice a difference with just a few stops of ND, but the more you add, the harder it becomes for the camera to lock focus. One advantage mirrorless cameras have over DSLRs is the option to disable “settings effect” in the EVF, but with heavy ND applied, the image will still appear grainy and harder to see.

 

[rumple]

One advantage mirrorless cameras have over DSLRs is the option to disable “settings effect” in the EVF, but with heavy ND applied, the image will still appear grainy and harder to see.

You and I have different experiences. NDs are used, generally, in bright conditions where focusing is not materially affected. With "settings effect", at least in Nikons focus is done from the stream to the viewfinder, which is now nice and bright. Not sure what you mean by 'heavy ND'; five stops is enough for almost everything and I would normally use three stops, although others may have different needs.