[fumanchu1]

Was an issue with my cc yesterday (was blocked on an unrelated charge) so I haven't made the purchase @bigmackcam do you still recommend them? I feel like I should try the K&F ones I saw and try them. If a few of us bite the bullet and purchase these and run a few tests we should be able to determine which brand over low cost product at reasonable quality and minimal degradation.

[BigMackCam]

I'd definitely recommend them. The only niggle is the blue cast, and that's such an easy thing to fix - even manually. Of far more importance, in my view, is that there is no obvious degradation in detail.

Having said that, K&F seem to be making some nice products too. It might be interesting to try them out ?

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

I am an occasional user of the more exotic filters, so look for the lower priced options. I've used Neewer for an IR 720 that is pretty decent. I have a Fotga ND slim wide band ND variable fader that is very good up to about 95% of maximum with very consistent results across the frame and no appreciable color shift. Fotga is part of the Nicna group. The Nicna Pro1-D slim PL-circular is also very good, and appears to be identical to the Hoya version.

[Huxley]

Quality nd filter, go for camdiox.

10 stops ND Filters Comparison: B+W 3.0 ND110 Vs Camdiox ND1000

[ffking]

A few weeks ago I posted about a very inexpensive but really rather decent 77mm Neewer multi-coated CPL filter I'd bought

Well, Mike, you never know what post is do. Looking at this, I wondered if they did one that would fit the Pentax 24-70 f/2,8 - so I went to my camera bag to check the filter size, and the lens wasn't there...

So, after turning the house upside down and checking the cars, I dashed off down to the local beach where I was last out taking pictures on the 28th. I left in the dark then, and I revisted in the dark now, retracing my steps back to the turned over dinghy I was sitting on, which was no longer there. I somewhat abjectly made my way back. flashing the torch around, when I caught a glimpse of something attached to the handrails of a path leading down to the beach - a laminated note saying a camera lens had been found - phew. I rang the number, and went straight round to get it, not least because the guy who'd found it was off to Australia on Monday.

So without his kindness and decency, I'd have lost that lens - and without this thread, I might not even have known I'd lost it until he was in Australia.

You never know where a thread will lead!

[BigMackCam]

Well, Mike, you never know what post is do. Looking at this, I wondered if they did one that would fit the Pentax 24-70 f/2,8 - so I went to my camera bag to check the filter size, and the lens wasn't there...

So, after turning the house upside down and checking the cars, I dashed off down to the local beach where I was last out taking pictures on the 28th. I left in the dark then, and I revisted in the dark now, retracing my steps back to the turned over dinghy I was sitting on, which was no longer there. I somewhat abjectly made my way back. flashing the torch around, when I caught a glimpse of something attached to the handrails of a path leading down to the beach - a laminated note saying a camera lens had been found - phew. I rang the number, and went straight round to get it, not least because the guy who'd found it was off to Australia on Monday.

So without his kindness and decency, I'd have lost that lens - and without this thread, I might not even have known I'd lost it until he was in Australia.

You never know where a thread will lead!

Oh, Graham!! What a story!!

A huge thumbs up to the gentleman who was (a) honest and decent enough to return the lens, and (b) resourceful enough to leave the laminated note in case you returned. Restores your faith somewhat, eh?

Oh, by the way - it's an 82mm filter diameter I don't think Neewer does an 82mm set, but somehow I suspect any minor disappointment at that will be offset by getting your lens back!!

[Lowell Goudge]

i would try a simple experiment before declaring a filter good or not.

take two identical shots of a row of street lights lit on a dark evening, one with the filter one without, and look for reflections added by the filter.

good and cheap are generally incompatible

[BigMackCam]

i would try a simple experiment before declaring a filter good or not.

take two identical shots of a row of street lights lit on a dark evening, one with the filter one without, and look for reflections added by the filter.

good and cheap are generally incompatible

That depends on your expectations, Lowell. The purpose of the thread wasn't to compare these cheap filters to high-end, high-performance models. Rather, it was to let people know that I'm getting results from them that are well beyond my expectations based on what I paid, and considerably better than cheap filters I've used in the past.

These cheap filters will undoubtedly have limitations, and I'm confident you could expect better performance from much-more-expensive, high end filters (both points mentioned in my original post). But for the use cases I've tried so far - involving daylight shooting where the intention is to allow a slow shutter speed and/or fast aperture - they're working very well with no discernible image quality degradation. On that basis alone, I happily declare them "good for the price paid".

[fumanchu1]

i would try a simple experiment before declaring a filter good or not.

take two identical shots of a row of street lights lit on a dark evening, one with the filter one without, and look for reflections added by the filter.

good and cheap are generally incompatible

Good way to determine if the filter adds reflections, haze etc.


but as Mack said, we are well aware that these filter (well any filter really) will have limitations. But if I can get a somewhat cheaper ND filter with no image degradations and little to no colorcast or added flares (in certain conditions) than I will be more than satisfied (hypothetically, lets say there are 20 situations one could find themselves in. In the cheap filter is good for say, 15 out of 20 of those situations and an expensive B+W is good in 18 or 19 out of 20 situations, I will consider it a great buy for my cheap filter and try to remain within those 15 situations where it does not degrade image quality... In this type of situation, I would be glad to have save almost 50% or more off the price of my cheapo filter rather than have a much more expensive filter that is good in a few more situations that I seldom find myself in)


In other words, its highly possible that the situations where the decent quality somewhat cheap filter would not work are situations I will rarely or never find myself in. (sick at this time, realised my paragraph was a bit all over the place so thought this shuold be easier to read and understand )

[Lowell Goudge]

Good way to determine if the filter adds reflections, haze etc.


but as Mack said, we are well aware that these filter (well any filter really) will have limitations. But if I can get a somewhat cheaper ND filter with no image degradations and little to no colorcast or added flares (in certain conditions) than I will be more than satisfied (hypothetically, lets say there are 20 situations one could find themselves in. In the cheap filter is good for say, 15 out of 20 of those situations and an expensive B+W is good in 18 or 19 out of 20 situations, I will consider it a great buy for my cheap filter and try to remain within those 15 situations where it does not degrade image quality... In this type of situation, I would be glad to have save almost 50% or more off the price of my cheapo filter rather than have a much more expensive filter that is good in a few more situations that I seldom find myself in)


In other words, its highly possible that the situations where the decent quality somewhat cheap filter would not work are situations I will rarely or never find myself in. (sick at this time, realised my paragraph was a bit all over the place so thought this shuold be easier to read and understand )

while this may be the case, the upcoming solar eclipse which will have every one scrambling for ND filters is a case where people will perhaps look for low cost ways to get a photo, and this is the exact case i am concerned with. the reflections that cheap filters can cause will ruin a perhaps once in a life time event. i would be really interested to see the performance long before committing a shot i cannot repeat to them, that's all

[BrianR]

Thanks for this post!

After reading, I decided to bravely take the plunge on a 77mm Neewar ND1000 filter. It is well made, no noticeable hit to sharpness (on my da14mm so far), it does have a colour cast but nothing like the cheapo green cast welding filters it's replacing. It was easily correctable using a passport colour checker, and could probably be done manually. I haven't done a flare test yet, I'll try including the sun in the frame next time I'm out, and also try it on a telephoto. Comparison shots as well, if I get around to it. So far it's impressive and I think will be fun addition.

[BigMackCam]

Thanks for this post!

After reading, I decided to bravely take the plunge on a 77mm Neewar ND1000 filter. It is well made, no noticeable hit to sharpness (on my da14mm so far), it does have a colour cast but nothing like the cheapo green cast welding filters it's replacing. It was easily correctable using a passport colour checker, and could probably be done manually. I haven't done a flare test yet, I'll try including the sun in the frame next time I'm out, and also try it on a telephoto. Comparison shots as well, if I get around to it. So far it's impressive and I think will be fun addition.

That's great, Brian. I don't have the ND1000, but based on my experiences with the milder NDs and your post above, I may add the ND1000 to my kit

[BrianR]

Here are 720 pixel wide crops from near the centre of a k5iis with da14mm. Top is bare lens, bottom is with the Neewer ND1000 77mm filter with identical processing as the top to show the colour shift. There might be a smidge more detail without the filter, but given the 59 second exposure on a windy day, I think it holds up well!



Note exposure was 1180 times as long with the filter, not 1000, and it still ended up a little under-exposed relatively speaking. The rolling clouds and changing light were likely a factor, so something more controlled would be in order, but it's certainly in the 1000x ball park. There was some slight vignetting with this combo, but not offensive, and easy enough to correct if you were so inclined. Here are the full images, the bottom has my quick colour correcting attempt using a passport colour checker as a target. It looks like it needs some modification, the light changed during the actual exposure (extremely windy day with spotty clouds), but it's close enough to be down to taste. No correction has been applied for the vignette.

[boriscleto]

I bit the bullet and bought an 82mm ICE ND1000 on Amazon. Haven't had a chance to try it yet.

[BigMackCam]

Here are 720 pixel wide crops from near the centre of a k5iis with da14mm. Top is bare lens, bottom is with the Neewer ND1000 77mm filter with identical processing as the top to show the colour shift. There might be a smidge more detail without the filter, but given the 59 second exposure on a windy day, I think it holds up well!

Note exposure was 1180 times as long with the filter, not 1000, and it still ended up a little under-exposed relatively speaking. The rolling clouds and changing light were likely a factor, so something more controlled would be in order, but it's certainly in the 1000x ball park. There was some slight vignetting with this combo, but not offensive, and easy enough to correct if you were so inclined. Here are the full images, the bottom has my quick colour correcting attempt using a passport colour checker as a target. It looks like it needs some modification, the light changed during the actual exposure (extremely windy day with spotty clouds), but it's close enough to be down to taste. No correction has been applied for the vignette.

Excellent results, Brian Yes, long exposures with a wooden structure on a windy day might be responsible for the very, very slight reduction in sharpness - although even if it was caused by the filter alone, I'd still say it's doing well at the price point. The colour shift is pretty minimal and inoffensive, too. Much better than many typical low-budget filters.