which ND filter to buy?????????

[tumble]

I was trying out some waterfall shots in the local park, trying to master the silky water effect and most of the pics were overexposed due to the slow shutter speeds.

I'm going to the Smoky Mountains in June and want to hike and shoot lots of waterfalls. After doing a little research to find out how I can achieve the effect I want, I release a ND filter will help in cutting the light reaching the sensor but what one do I buy?

I see they come in various levels, 2, 4, 8.

Anyone have an opinion on which one would be best for me?

Shooting with Drebel and either canon 28-135mm IS or Sigma 70-300mm APO

[msvadi]

I think that you need shutter speeds about 1/2 sec to make the water look silky ( I shot only small waterfalls in a forest, so I might be wrong). You can achive such shutter speeds if you really stop down the camera (large f numbers) on a not too bright sunny days without any filters.

As far as I remember Hoya ND 4 will give you 2 stops.

[cmM]

Well it depends on how slow your shutter speed will be. Starting from an initial "good" exposure, even if it means you freeze the falling water, 1 stop will cut in half your shutter speed (twice as long).

Take an initial "good exposure, then take an exposure at the desired shutter speed, see the difference, and go from there.

[tumble]

I'm thinking of bright sunny days, like it was this weekend when I tried it out.

I had the lens at max F/stop and still looked like a scene from Xfiles...lol

[cmM]

I had the lens at max F/stop and still looked like a scene from Xfiles...lol

Maximum aperture you mean ? Why would you wanna do that? At f2.8 or f3.5 you'll get very little depth of field. You want small aperture f11, f16. That's gonna give you more depth of field AND the opportunity to use slower shutter speeds.

[tumble]

oops, I meant the other way, had it at f22

I always forget max = low no.

[ohenry]

I went through this same process and opted to go the Cokin route with HiTech graduated ND filters. I went with a 0.6 hard and a 0.6 soft. If I want, I can get the 0.3's and stack them to give even greater effect.

[Jim_T]

I've got a Tiffen ND8 that I use now and then.. I originally got it for an old Pro90 I used to own, but kept it since the thread matches my EF 28-105 and EF 100-300 lenses.

I rarely use it.. I guess if I were blurring waterfalls in direct sunlight a lot, it would get more use :)

[NILOLIGIST]

Iam thinking of getting one. I want it because I shoot a lot in bright sunlight and I want to reduce some of the glare and the overexposure. Is this what I should get to help me?

NiL,

[robertwgross]

It depends on the water.

One case might be a simple stream or river running horizontally over rocks. Getting the "silky smooth" effect can be done with moderately long shutter speeds.

Another case might be the cascade, where the water is plunging short distances over rocks. It is the same as the above effect, except the water is falling farther and faster, so it takes almost the same shutter speeds.

Another case is the big waterfall (like 2000 feet or more). There, the action is purely vertical, so it takes no effort at all to get the water to blur correctly, even with moderately quick shutter speeds.

For normal blue sunny skies, I use a polarizer, which can also be used as a straight neutral density filter. For a bright sky/dark foreground problem, I apply a graduated neutral density filter (Cokin type) to darken the sky.

---Bob Gross---