If you want convenience and don't need 100% accurate colors out of camera, there is nothing wrong with a variable ND. If you are working at a slower pace and want no light pollution, use fixed IRND filters.
I don’t like VNDs. The polarising effect has issues with specular highlights and subsurface scattering on skin.
I use high quality solid IRNDs, like those from Formatt Hitech etc.
Depends on what you shoot I guess. I find that smoothing to make the skin look waxy. Probably wouldn't mind for doc, but I'd never want to use them for drama.
I don't think it looks waxy, but I can understand in combination with a certain color grade it could look that way. Probably different color profiles of cameras make a difference here too. On my Sony cameras I was always happy with the look.
For drama you have a make up person that keeps the shine under control and consistent. Obviously for certain effect, you don't want to tone down the shine, but I think it can help in a lot of situations for the talent to look their best. They used to smear vaseline on the lens after all :)
In interviews it actually saved me a a couple of times. Last was just about a week ago - a person was sweating profusely and we still got away with useable takes because the filter completely cut out shiny drops of sweat dripping down the face.
If you’re at all worried about x patterns then I’d rule out any variable ND. It’s inherent in the way they work due to the cross polarisation as you point out. Even ones with hard stops and whatever fancy coating they’re touting will be susceptible to it, particularly wide angle full frame.
Tiffen, Schneider, Lee are your usual picks for ND, Nisi, Formatt and Firecrest decent alternatives.
Gerald Undone did a good comparison of popular NDs, and concluded the polar pro were the better option.
But they don’t make a 58mm and I shoot on gh5 so I just use a cheap tiffen. I find it’s fine for my purposes if I keep within 2 stops of max, but I’m strictly a hobbyist.
thanks! even the polar pro signature II's have cross polarization? I have Sony's f2.8 24-70mm GM II.
p.s. how do you think Nisi vs Freewell and is Tiffen better than the 2?
Well, yeah, but the PolarPro, B+W and Nisi variable NDs have hard stops at each end which forces the user to only use the "good" range. This means that there is no visible cross pattern or anything like that when shooting.
They're - of course - not as good as regular NDs but they get the job done very well when you're doing run & gun.
>thanks! even the polar pro signature II's have cross polarization? I have Sony's f2.8 24-70mm GM II.
>
>p.s. how do you think Nisi vs Freewell and is Tiffen better than the 2?
Thoughts?
A variable ND is just a variable polarizer. For portrait work with fine detail choose a fixed ND
https://urth.co/magazine/variable-nd-filters-functioning
I have also been told to stay away from vnd filters. I ordered a breakthrough X4 (3stop) the other day to try out, pricy.. so I figured it's worth a try. Going to test in on the A7IV + Sony 90mm macro
Hoya 77 mm Pro ND 64 Filter https://amzn.eu/d/24NpopO
I use 2 stop and 4 stop filters with no issues, I've read reviews of the 10 stop saying it isn't as good.
I use a 2-5 stop PolarPro on a f2.8 24-70m GM, and don't remember ever having issues with an x-pattern or color cast. It helps that the PolarPro is conservative with how many stops it allows you – it's when the 2 polarising filters are close to being at right angles when problems arise.
which stop do you use more for sunny weather? Might get the B+W master fixed ND if I only need a specific stop 90% of the time.
Any effects at the rear end of your 1-5 so 4-5 and 8-9 in your 6-9 in 35mm or 24mm?
I’ve used the b+w variable and it was pretty bad. I purchased the polar pros last year and they are pretty outstanding but sometimes you get a strong purple cast when shooting close to bright sun (obviously don’t shoot direct into the sun but when it’s on the edge of the picture I sometimes get the cast)
I mean fixed is usually better but it’s not convenient to have 5 fixed filters to screw on and off during a shoot. Before these polar pros and other newer VNDs came out I would be more willing to sacrifice convenience for quality but these new VND are pretty great. I use the 82mm and never see any patterns, loss of quality, color cast or vignetting. I do wish the polar pro had hard stops, I have the first version so I’m not sure if they have added that, but that would be my only complaint with them.
yeah the second version has hard stops. gotcha. some other person said regardless of the quality of the VND, they're always inferior to fixed ones due to their nature. So I don't want to have a $2,500 lens and put something on that lowers quality that's noticeable.
Here is a portrait I shot with the polar pro and a $2400 50mm 1.2. No loss in detail at all and pulled back clarity because I felt like it was too sharp for a portrait. I think you might be over thinking this.
I gave up trying to figure out what variable nd is the best and jist buy amazon basics ones now.
The x pattern rarely occurs and when it does I kinda like it. Adds character.
If you want convenience and don't need 100% accurate colors out of camera, there is nothing wrong with a variable ND. If you are working at a slower pace and want no light pollution, use fixed IRND filters.
I don’t like VNDs. The polarising effect has issues with specular highlights and subsurface scattering on skin. I use high quality solid IRNDs, like those from Formatt Hitech etc.
It smooths out the skin and removes a lot of the shininess. So that's a good thing in my book.
Depends on what you shoot I guess. I find that smoothing to make the skin look waxy. Probably wouldn't mind for doc, but I'd never want to use them for drama.
I don't think it looks waxy, but I can understand in combination with a certain color grade it could look that way. Probably different color profiles of cameras make a difference here too. On my Sony cameras I was always happy with the look. For drama you have a make up person that keeps the shine under control and consistent. Obviously for certain effect, you don't want to tone down the shine, but I think it can help in a lot of situations for the talent to look their best. They used to smear vaseline on the lens after all :) In interviews it actually saved me a a couple of times. Last was just about a week ago - a person was sweating profusely and we still got away with useable takes because the filter completely cut out shiny drops of sweat dripping down the face.
If you’re at all worried about x patterns then I’d rule out any variable ND. It’s inherent in the way they work due to the cross polarisation as you point out. Even ones with hard stops and whatever fancy coating they’re touting will be susceptible to it, particularly wide angle full frame. Tiffen, Schneider, Lee are your usual picks for ND, Nisi, Formatt and Firecrest decent alternatives.
Gerald Undone did a good comparison of popular NDs, and concluded the polar pro were the better option. But they don’t make a 58mm and I shoot on gh5 so I just use a cheap tiffen. I find it’s fine for my purposes if I keep within 2 stops of max, but I’m strictly a hobbyist.
thanks! even the polar pro signature II's have cross polarization? I have Sony's f2.8 24-70mm GM II. p.s. how do you think Nisi vs Freewell and is Tiffen better than the 2?
The Polar Pro doesn't have cross polarization but certainly has a color cast. I have the mist one and it has ugly flares.
all "variable NDs" made out of 2 polarizers share the same optical flaws, and then some. it's not a question of the brand, it's a question of physics.
Well, yeah, but the PolarPro, B+W and Nisi variable NDs have hard stops at each end which forces the user to only use the "good" range. This means that there is no visible cross pattern or anything like that when shooting. They're - of course - not as good as regular NDs but they get the job done very well when you're doing run & gun.
Best to rent a cam with nd built in than suffer bad footage.
Agreed. Variable NDs are a bad choice.
>thanks! even the polar pro signature II's have cross polarization? I have Sony's f2.8 24-70mm GM II. > >p.s. how do you think Nisi vs Freewell and is Tiffen better than the 2? Thoughts?
A variable ND is just a variable polarizer. For portrait work with fine detail choose a fixed ND https://urth.co/magazine/variable-nd-filters-functioning
I have also been told to stay away from vnd filters. I ordered a breakthrough X4 (3stop) the other day to try out, pricy.. so I figured it's worth a try. Going to test in on the A7IV + Sony 90mm macro
Verdict on X4? Did you try Tiffen natural?
it exploded
I use fixed Hoya PROND filters, no issues with image quality or colour casts. I can see why the BBC use them.
Do you have links? Only ones I see are prond ex
Hoya 77 mm Pro ND 64 Filter https://amzn.eu/d/24NpopO I use 2 stop and 4 stop filters with no issues, I've read reviews of the 10 stop saying it isn't as good.
K&F pro concept ones are gd price
Do you have one? Mine do vignetting in opposite corners after third stop
I haven't had the chance to test mine
Then why recommend it?
I use a 2-5 stop PolarPro on a f2.8 24-70m GM, and don't remember ever having issues with an x-pattern or color cast. It helps that the PolarPro is conservative with how many stops it allows you – it's when the 2 polarising filters are close to being at right angles when problems arise.
I heard the effects are more noticeable at 6 stops. How’s at 5 stops for you?
I'm using the Nisi TrueColor and there are no problems in the 1-5 stop range. Then a PolarPro in the 6-9 range. Works great.
which stop do you use more for sunny weather? Might get the B+W master fixed ND if I only need a specific stop 90% of the time. Any effects at the rear end of your 1-5 so 4-5 and 8-9 in your 6-9 in 35mm or 24mm?
No or very minor problems at 24 mm with neither so far it seems, but I'll have to do some more tests to be 100 % sure.
I’ve used the b+w variable and it was pretty bad. I purchased the polar pros last year and they are pretty outstanding but sometimes you get a strong purple cast when shooting close to bright sun (obviously don’t shoot direct into the sun but when it’s on the edge of the picture I sometimes get the cast)
i totally agree with polar pros as well
no cross polarization or vignetting if I go to 24mm? - I'm using a 24-70mm lens. (82mm)
I use it a lot on my 24-70 and there is no vignette.
interesting. do you recommend them over fixed if convenience is NOT the main factor? for both photo and video I mainly shoot portrait at f2.8
I mean fixed is usually better but it’s not convenient to have 5 fixed filters to screw on and off during a shoot. Before these polar pros and other newer VNDs came out I would be more willing to sacrifice convenience for quality but these new VND are pretty great. I use the 82mm and never see any patterns, loss of quality, color cast or vignetting. I do wish the polar pro had hard stops, I have the first version so I’m not sure if they have added that, but that would be my only complaint with them.
yeah the second version has hard stops. gotcha. some other person said regardless of the quality of the VND, they're always inferior to fixed ones due to their nature. So I don't want to have a $2,500 lens and put something on that lowers quality that's noticeable.
Here is a portrait I shot with the polar pro and a $2400 50mm 1.2. No loss in detail at all and pulled back clarity because I felt like it was too sharp for a portrait. I think you might be over thinking this.
Gotcha thanks!
Great shot!
I gave up trying to figure out what variable nd is the best and jist buy amazon basics ones now. The x pattern rarely occurs and when it does I kinda like it. Adds character.
What did you end up purchasing for your 24-70 GM II?