Cokin P Series holder and ND Grad filters

I picked up a Cokin P filter holder [square/rectangular filters], and adapter ring for my 4x5 camera at a pretty good price, now I am trying to find some ND graduated filters for it. (black and white, not color).

Looks like this size differs from the Lee system, so my options are somewhat limited. Maybe I should be looking at a lee holder/ring instead. I noticed that Tiffen, Singh-Ray, and Hightech make filters that fit this holder, and are available via B&H.

Most ND grad filters available appear to be square, rather than rectangular. Is this likely to hamper me much? I noticed some Lee holder style filters are longer, giving me more latitude placing my horizon, but I don't know if the plain square ones will suffice or not.

Also, will resin filters give me decent clarity, or must I go with glass? HiTech has some resin filters for about a third the cost of Tiffen glass ones. I wonder if these are any good? I have heard the actual Cokin filters are pretty much junk.

I am thinking of looking for a one, two, and three stop grads, soft-style. Any thoughts? Do you use soft more than hard? For what style photos?

Obviously, this is a rambling post, but I would appreciate any comments before I throw down a bunch of cash on filters that may not be very useful.

I have used the square filters in many different formats of cameras and never found the square filters to be a hamper, Also Cokin makes their own line of square glass filters as well that are very good quality and less expensive than the competing brands, I have also used Lee filters in my Cokin holder, they will fit if they are 3" square, I don't know much about the HiTech square filter, but tried a couple of their screw in filters and found the quality to be lacking.

Cokin filters are good or bad depending on which ones you use, their ND filters in some cases are not completely neutral, which in color photography can be a big problem, but may not be so much of a problem in B&W. Before using any resin filter I would be sure and inspect it strongly to make sure their are no artifacts that could cause distortion in the image, which with resin can be a problem.

Dave

I have a Cokin P kit with a couple of ND grads in it, they are rectangular. You could try them out if you'd like to get together for some shooting. Interesting thing you can stack the grads if you want to, the Cokin holder has three slots in it. Round ones are nice when you want to stack ND grads at multiple angles on those rare occasions.

I've used Cokin for a number of years, recently I've switched to the Lee system. I never had any issues the the square split ND filters - actually they are grey grads, not true ND. I have only used the 1 and 2 stop grads; I found very little need for the 3 stop. I never found any reason to doubt the clarity of the filters; if you kept them clean.

As I mentioned, I recently switched to the Lee system. Primarily because it is more versatile, and the quality of the holders is outstanding. But, the downside is the cost; where I could get a Cokin holder for about $20, the Lee holder is closer to $75. Filters are also much higher. Costs aside, I am much happier with the Lee system. The only problem I have found with the Lee is getting the filters - I've been trying for months to get a hard grad .3. I think I am just going to order from Robert White and just deal with any customs issues that come along.

I've got both systems (Cokin and Lee). You don't mention what camera you are using these with. With field style view cameras, the longer filters can sometimes bump agains the camera bed. Aside from that issue, I always recommend to my students that if they can afford the rectangular filters, by all means get them. Some of my most interesting compositions include just a sliver of sky and the square filters don't provide the coverage to accommodate an image like that with a lens like my 45mm Pentax 67.

Ditto on Dave's comments about the Cokin NDs not being neutral. The manufacturers you mention all produce fine quality filters. I'm rough on my equipment and favor glass filters over Resin when I can get them to minimize the chance of abrasions spoiling the surface.

For starters, the 1 and 2 stop filters are adequate, as they can be stacked to add up to 3 stops (which seems to be the exposure difference I encounter most in landscapes like Yosemite). But if you want to spring for a 3 as well, that gives you a little more to play with. Galen Rowell had a special 5-stop filter, though I found many of his images over-filtered to my taste. One of my students recently put it best..."Too much make-up."

As was pointed out, we need to know more about what type of camera you are using. I've got a Toyo 45AII, it is a folding field camera. I find that the rectangular Lee filters sometimes hit the bed. FWIW, I only use the split ND or 81 series filters. Probably one of the things I like most about the Lee system though is the folding lens shade; you can buy them separate or with filter slots built in. For the type of work I do, I find them enormously helpful.

Thanks for the helpful comments so far. I use an Ebony 4x5 wood field camera. 60% of the time I shoot with a 150mm lens, about 20% a 90mm, and 20% a 210mm.

These are the Tiffen (glass, I think) filters that I could purchase:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...=&ci=4032&ac=&Submit.x=5&Submit.y=9&Submit=Go

Those are about $125, however. I believe they are square, though they have a 3 stop version that is quoted as being "long". I have some circular Tiffen filters that I think I pretty decent. The $125 price tag kind of turns me off.


These are the Hitech "resin" filters. Might be acceptable:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...=&ci=4032&ac=&Submit.x=6&Submit.y=8&Submit=Go

They are around $39 bucks for the various versions.

Here are the Singh-Ray filters. You'd think for $98 a pop, they would say what they are made of, but they don't:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...=&ci=4032&ac=&Submit.x=5&Submit.y=7&Submit=Go

Jeff if you are shooting solely B+W then I think the Cokin P filters will be fine. With colour you can definitely see a difference between these and the Lee ones. You will not get vignetting with the 90mm lens and Cokin P either, your 150 and 210 will be fine. I would recommend using your lightmeter to measure the strength of density which the Cokin provide and make a note of this on your filter pouch.

I use ND grads with B+W to control contrast in many of my B+W images. I made the switch to Lee for my colour images and last week used 6 1/2 stops across the sky in one picture (stacking 0.9, 0.6 and 0.45) and still had not detectable colour shift. This picture has 6 stops on the top of the image (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

The links from B+H which you provided aren't helpful with the pictures implying square, but notice that they come under the rectangular filters section. You definitely need a rectangular filter to place the transition where you want in the image. Otherwise using Front rises and falls to do this would be a huge pain.

In terms of catching the filter on the camera bed, it depends on which Ebony model you have. I was fine with the Cokin P on an RSW45, but the Lee ones did impinge on it. On my SU45, the Lee ones are fine most of the time, but have needed Rear Rise on occasion.

If you don't want to go for Cokin then at the prices of the systems sold by B+H the Lee ones look a good buy if you get the ND set of 0.3, 0.6 and 0.9 which is essentially a 3 for price of 2 deal see http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/lee.htm You should have no worries about the optical quality of their resin filters.

HTH

Baxter, that is a stunning image, very nice..

Dave

I agree with everything Baxter said. One more thing, put the Cokin and Lee systems side by side, and the quality difference will be immediate; the Cokin system is just very cheap plastic. Yes, you are going to pay more, but the quality makes up for it.

Another thing you might consider, if you are going to do color work, is glare on the front lens element. Lee has some excellent lens shades. Look about 1/3 of the way down the Robert White page that Baxter provided, and you will see some great self supporting bellows lens hoods that will help with that issue. I've used the standard hood with my Schneider 80mm XL lens with no vignetting.

I'm not a large-format user but I can attest that the Singh-Ray grads are excellent filters. They are rectangular in shape--not square--and they are resin but that's all they have in common with Cokin's resin filters. The Cokin resin filters I have used have proven to be optically wretched.

What a wonderful chance for me to display my discrimination and ignorance. Oh boy!

If I were to use a resin filter my choice would be to try an Optiflex. I have used the Lee polyester filters and found them to be lacking in durability but optically satisfactory.

The reason I would want to try an Optiflex is that I believe that a thinner filter will display less optical degredation. I realize that my response is of little help regarding a neutral grad filter since I do not believe Optiflex makes one. For a ND grad I would choose a glass square or rectangular filter. I believe that Tiffen made one to fit your holder. I do not know if it is still being offered for sale.

roteague said:

I agree with everything Baxter said. One more thing, put the Cokin and Lee systems side by side, and the quality difference will be immediate; the Cokin system is just very cheap plastic. Yes, you are going to pay more, but the quality makes up for it.

Click to expand...

What differences in quality do you expect? Sharpness? Contrast? Color casts?

I must have a good one, because I can't detect any image degradation with my cheap Cokin "grey" ND.

MikeM1977 said:

I must have a good one, because I can't detect any image degradation with my cheap Cokin "grey" ND.

Click to expand...

I've used the Cokin "grey" ND grads myself for years, only recently did I switch to the Lee system. My comment was just in reference to the quality of the materials used; holders, adapter rings, filter cases etc., since I really have no means of testing the filters themselves. However, I have found that those companies that skimp on the presentation, also skimp on their product as well. I haven't used the Lee long enough to prove that, but I trust what Baxter tells me (and his friend Joe Cornish as well).

I've got some tiffen filters in the cokin size. They are glass just like their cine filters of larger sizes. My 81A is square but the 2stop soft grad is slightly longer. You shouldn't have a problem with these. The nice thing is the writing on the filter is barely visible so you can flip the filter for sunset shots on the water to make a reverse grad. You won't see the edge of the filter. The sing-ray's i have use metallic gold lettering that's quite large. I was reluctant to buy sing-ray's resin filters since i've only delt with schneider and tiffen glass filters in the movie biz. Resin filters can scratch but won't break if you drop them. The sing-rays are plenty long, longer than the tiffens.So far i haven't had to clean my sing-ray filter so i can't say how durable the surfaces are. If you use your cokin P holder on top of a polarizer with your 90mm, you'll probably get vignetting. I cut the last filter slot off with a hack saw. Cokin also makes a wide angle holder that has fewer slots.

wildbill said:

If you use your cokin P holder on top of a polarizer with your 90mm, you'll probably get vignetting. I cut the last filter slot off with a hack saw. Cokin also makes a wide angle holder that has fewer slots.

Click to expand...

One more advantage with the Lee system. The filters are not only longer they are wider (100mm vs 86mm). You also don't need a hacksaw to remove a fliter slot; a flat tip screwdriver will do. And you can add filters slots as well, with a screwdriver.

MikeM1977 said:

What differences in quality do you expect? Sharpness? Contrast? Color casts?

I must have a good one, because I can't detect any image degradation with my cheap Cokin "grey" ND.

Click to expand...

Putting anything in front of a lens with cause some optical degradation and minimising air/surface boundaries is accepted good practice. Whether this optical degradation can be detected and is directly attributable to the filter(s) I leave to others to comment upon, since I haven't noticed any with either Filter system, but that isn't to say that it isn't present- it will be!

In terms of colour casts, I too thought that my Cokin P were absolutely fine. After switching to Lee, I realised that this wasn't the case. The Cokin filters were inducing a bias. So much so that when showing transparencies others could detect which make of filters I was using. The Lee ones are completely neutral, to my eye, even with massive amounts of filtration like 6 1/2 stops (0.9+0.6+0.45 Hard ND grads) here (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Others may measure Lee or any other make of filter with instruments such as a Densitometer and find I am erroneous, or their eye detects that this isn't the case.

Getting the picture is what matters to me. The Lee system gives me the confidence to do that. For COLOUR images, I now realise that Cokin wouldn't.

Jeff stated in the original post that he only shoots in B+W and didn't want to spend his money unwisely.

MikeM.

Some time ago, I posted a response to a question on Cokin filters. I've probably posted my experience with Cokin filters several times since I tend to repeat myself as I get older, but...

Basically, several years ago I did a "down-and-dirty" test of a dozen or so Cokin filters. My method was simple: holding them in front of a 400/5.6L Canon autofocus lens and viewing through them. No photographs were made because it wasn't necessary. The filters were so bad I could not make out the subject.

Cokin may have improved their product over the years but I would certainly do this quick and easy test before trusting one of those filters with my photos.