Do neutral density filters degrade image quality when shooting film?
Neutral density filters
-
A
- Thread starter anthonym3
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Free Mini Radio triggers: Light pix lab Flash Q
- Started by RoboRepublic
-
Want to Buy Kodak Polytoner
- Started by Guillaume Zuili
-
For Sale PLAUBEL MAKINA 67 GRIP
- Started by Guillaume Zuili
-
For Sale FS: Gundlach-Manhattan Hyperion Diffusion 7in f/4 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
Seconded, and I'll only add that after testing it reasonably carefully, I concluded that it has to be a remarkably crappy filter to degrade image quality in any appreciable way, with the exception that in certain conditions, a filter can cause extra flare.
I've even stacked two pretty cheap resin (i.e. not even glass) neutral density filters together and was only barely able to see a slight degradation of the image at very high magnification. At that point, I stopped worrying about filters and learned to be happy. With the flare exception noted, of course.
MattKing
Moderator
They can cause problem with colour - it is difficult to manufacture a strong neutral density filter that is completely neutral.
As with many other things, you pay for high quality.
...typically, single-coated NDs show an unpleasant green cast. (even the branded ones). Buy the best MC ones - and this advice applies to contrast filters too.
I had desastrous results with a cheap variable ND filter. Stay away of those
I used to do a lot of night photography and learned very quickly that if you have a light source in the photo, such as a streetlight, depending on the angles you can get a sort of secondary reflection in your photo if you have a filter on. So my advice for that sort of photography is always remove any filter.
^ I'm with you on this one ( I just may be a bit naive 
) . Peter
) . Peter
The OP needs ND-filters, Mark advised to use no filters at all, which makes no sense with the OP's request in mind.
I proposed as an alternative for Mark's issue to use ghostless-filters, which does not help the OP though, as I do not know of ND-filters ever made in a ghostless version.
I proposed as an alternative for Mark's issue to use ghostless-filters, which does not help the OP though, as I do not know of ND-filters ever made in a ghostless version.
I was merely making an observation about using filters learned in the school of hard knocks. I actually wasn't specifically responding to the OP. I have no idea what a ghostless filter is, maybe it's an "in" joke? Photography is somewhat of a scientific medium and it is helpful to make factual, meaningful observations, not snide innuendos.
Two good points raised by others that I glossed over in my first reply:
I didn't think of variable neutral-density filters; they can indeed create big problems in an image, including weird variable color shifts and variable or even radial vignetting. I don't use them.
And it's true that even single-strength ND filters can cause color and contrast shifts, especially very strong ND filters (like a 10-stop). I don't consider those issues major ones, however, since they are easily corrected, as long as they are uniform across the image. In fact, I consider correcting for color and contrast to be just part of the color imaging process, necessary to some degree on almost every picture.
I didn't think of variable neutral-density filters; they can indeed create big problems in an image, including weird variable color shifts and variable or even radial vignetting. I don't use them.
And it's true that even single-strength ND filters can cause color and contrast shifts, especially very strong ND filters (like a 10-stop). I don't consider those issues major ones, however, since they are easily corrected, as long as they are uniform across the image. In fact, I consider correcting for color and contrast to be just part of the color imaging process, necessary to some degree on almost every picture.
It is no joke. I explicetely explained it in my post. At least Hoya once offered a lot of their filters in such variation. Intended to solve an issue, which made you reject filters.
I am trying to be helpful, but am blamed for that...
Last edited:
MattKing
Moderator
.I think we have a language discrepancy here
I'm guessing that AgX is using "ghostless" to refer to coated filters that reduce reflections.
.
NO!
"Ghosting" and "ghostless" are standard terms in optics. There are different means to cope with ghosting.
AR-coating is only one.
BUT:
For those who do not know I described those filters a being formed as "meniscus of 0 diopters".
Ghostless filters may have a curved front on the glass to match the front lens element. Pentax made them.
MattKing
Moderator
And a bit of Google work seems to indicate that they were particular to Pentax, and they haven't been made for years.
I will leave it to those who are more steeped in Pentax lore to provide any additional info that might be useful.
The principle might have been used by others without using the "ghostless" label. It is a strange term, and I had never encountered it before.
I regulary use two ND filters (0.3 and 0.6) made by B&W Schneider - Kreuznach - no problems, no color shift. I have a -cheaper- graduated ND filter made by Cokin and this one produces some purple color shift in the skies.
There are various methods to make ND filters. B&W use opaque glass panes from Schott. The most equalized ND filters I know are of undyed glass with a metal coating.
Colour shifts between several film types and maybe even lenses likely are stronger than the above variations.
Colour shifts between several film types and maybe even lenses likely are stronger than the above variations.
I've used a lot of "crappy" (or cheap) ND filters with no noticeable change in color cast or sharpness, even when pixel peeping. I tend to think that the worst thing about crappy filters is that they scratch easily, but who knows? I guess it depends on the crappy filter.
If I need a piece of gear, I always buy something cheap first to see if it suits my needs without having to put out a lot of money. I have been satisfied more than not, to be honest. But then again, I am a cheap bastard.
If I need a piece of gear, I always buy something cheap first to see if it suits my needs without having to put out a lot of money. I have been satisfied more than not, to be honest. But then again, I am a cheap bastard.
Thanks for the updating on filter terms ( I did mention I was a bit naive ) , being near the ocean and mountains I must mention the use
of 81A and on occasion 81B have helped with some Provia pics . Peter
) , being near the ocean and mountains I must mention the useof 81A and on occasion 81B have helped with some Provia pics . Peter
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |