Standard ND filter for waterfalls?

I've been reading the recent posts, but still have a question and didn't want to hijack someone else's thread.

I am hoping to shoot some waterfalls in the near future and I envision using a Polarizer and standard ND filter (not grad). I already have a Polarizer and I have a Cokin 'P' holder. However, I am really struggling to find standard ND filters to fit it! I have checked the websites for Lee, Singh-Ray, Hoya and B&W, but they only have grads or reverse grads in the rectangular size (84mm) that fits the Cokin P holder. The standard ND filters seem to be the round screw on type. The only ones I found were Cokin and HiTech, which both get mixed reviews.

Am I missing something? What does everyone else use?
Incidently, I am thinking I would go for a 4-stop ND filter. Any comments on that are also appreciated.

Why not screw a round ND into the lens and add the Cokin holder to that?

I agree with your choice of 4-stop.

I've got square NDs, but bought them 20+ years ago. I'm kinda surprised that they aren't still available today, but I'll add the insight to the growing evidence of my geezerdom.

If Singh Ray, what you're looking for is George Lepp Solid Neutral Density Filters:

http://www.singh-ray.com/morefilt.html

You can choose the size and density from the drop-down menu.

If Singh Ray, what you're looking for is George Lepp Solid Neutral Density Filters

Thanks! I was all over that website and did not see this. $150 aint cheap - are they worth it?

Hank, my polarizer is round and I'm a little nervous about adding another round filter, especially if I'm working in and around water. I'm new enough that I don't have a feel for what others use, so I'm wide open for suggestions. Keep 'em coming.

In the past I've used Hitech GNDs for landscape shots and I've been very happy with those. I believe they generally have a good reputation and, personally, I wouldn't hesitate to buy one of their NDs.

Now for some unsolicited advice . . . You may actually find that an ND is not even necessary to get a longer exposure time for a waterfall or small cascade. If you're going for 1/2 second to 1 second exposures, that's generally been no trouble for me unless the subject is in bright sun. Usually though, these types of scenes have a fair amount of shade and once you stop down your lens, you're already looking at about the right exposure length for moving water. Now if you want a 15 or 30 second exposure, that's another story.

I'd say they're worth it. If you're stacking filters, you should be able to have more total stops with brands like Singh Ray or Lee before you get colour shifts, especially with long exposures. However, you will get colour shifts even with these brands, if you stack enough total stops together. Cokin p-size aren't neutral even when used individually.

For me, the issue with stacking round filters is that they have a tendency to really get stuck together especially with changing temperature. Carrying a rubber band could be a good idea for changing filters in the field.

I use Hi-tech ND filters in a P-holder. No complaints.

Waterfalls can be very tricky because texture in the falling water is what is needed, and is difficult to achieve. As was mentioned, if the 'basin' is much lower in value than than the falling water, and you use a ND filter, you'll need to expose for the shadows to hold the detail there. You'll then need to check the histogram to see if the tones in the falling water are clipped (over exposed). In any event, it will be a balancing act.

I suggest that you scout out the falls you want to photograph and get an idea of the conditions under which the lighting will be fairly even; perhaps subdued. This will give you your best shot at, well, the shot.

--P

Excellent advice and much appreciated. Since my polarizer is round, I think I will go for a ND that fits the Cokin P holder - not a Cokin filter though, probably Hitech or Singh-Ray.

If conditions are favorable, I may not even need it. The polarizer gives me about 2 stops and that, along with a small aperature & ISO, may be enough to get a SS in the range of 1/2 to 2 seconds. So the ND will only be used as needed, if its sunny or if I linger towards midday. Thanks everyone!

Jeff,

Remember that a polarizer will tend to eliminate reflections, with the strongest effect at 90 degrees from the light source. You'll need to check to see if any reflections in your shot are required as a compositional element. If they are, your polarizer may be a hindrance, rather than a help. In such a case, your ND filter will be a better choice.

For example, let's say you have a nice waterfall surrounded by trees with nice fall color, and you really like the reflection of the trees in the pool at the base of the fall. If you crank up the polarization, the reflection may be either eliminated, or significantly reduced. Your ND filter would be the better choice, in this case.

Now, let's say that there are nice rocks on the bottom of the pool that you would like to see, but the reflections off the water's surface tend to subdue them. This is a case where the polarizer will be advantageous.

It's almost always a good idea to have options in your tool kit, so that you can achieve what you want.

--P

Excellent post, Preston (as usual!).

I agree - excellent. The falls are about 3 hrs away and this will be my first visit, so I won't be able to scout the location ahead of time. Having the tools to adapt will be key, and your tips will allow me to be mentally prepared too. Thanks.

Jeff, as a side note, you can get away without an ND shooting waterfalls if you use the following techniques:
-set your camera to its lowest ISO capabilities (50 or 100)
-stop down to your smallest aperture
-shoot on overcast days or dawn/dusk
-use a polarizer
You should have no trouble getting slow shutter speeds to achieve water blurs this way.
In my experience, bright conditions are rarely ideal for waterfalls, anyway.
cheers,
Ethan

they are on ebay in many sizes.

Standard 85mm Cokin P ND filters are not hard to find. B&H carries them from Hitech, Singh-ray and others. My recommendation is to purchase a 4 stop ND. Working in combination with a CPL, you get 2 stops (CPL), 4 stops (ND) or 6 stops (CPL+ND) and that covers a pretty wide range of scenarios.

In opposition to Ethan's view, there are a number of reasons to use an ND filter to reduce exposure rather than aperture and ISO, including but not limited to diffraction issues and artistic considerations.

I personally carry a Hitech 4 stop ND filter and CPLs in my kit. The ND filter cost somewhere between $30 and $45. I don't use it constantly, but it is a useful part of my kit. Hitech filters do not block IR as much as visible light, and some digital users have complained of a magenta cast on images with strong ND filters. This magenta cast is a result of the IR sensitivity of DSLRs and does not occur on film designed for the visible spectrum. But the 4 stop ND is not so strong that I've ever noticed any IR impact on my DSLR either. 8 stops would be a different story.

As for why I use the square filter, I shoot 4x5 film and do need to use warming filters, graduated ND filters, etc. In order to reduce the quantity of filters I carry in the field and make the GND filters useful, I use rectangular filter holders and adapter rings for my various lenses. My polarizer filters are threaded, but all others are rectangular. No they probably aren't as perfect as a multi-coated B+W ND filter, but they get the job done with a minimal impact on image quality in most situations.

If you are shooting a waterfall in full sunlight, where a ND filter would be needed to blur the water, then you really aren't shooting at the best time of day for landscape photography. 4 stops is a LOT. I can typically use just my POL filter to get the needed blur when shooting at ISO 100/200 and stopping the lens down. The POL filter is a good idea as it removes reflections from the water and foliage, making the leaves more green.

That being said, I've used my Singh Ray split ND grads to fully cover the lens for slower shutter speeds. Unless you have an extremely big front element, the P size should have enough full ND area to cover the lens.

You're welcome to that opinion, but even in shade or overcast, a 4 stop ND provides alot of flexibility. Coupled with a CPL you've really got a huge range of flexibility. Maybe you want to combine selective focus with water blur. 2 stops typical of a CPL will not be enough. Or maybe there is a reason to shoot in bright light, like a rainbow forming specifically in those hours, or color in the water specifically in these hours. Or maybe you want full silk blur for the water. These filters can be combined for cloud movement effects at sunrise or sunset as well.

I really appreciate all the great points (and counter points) being made. I'm soaking it all in, as I need to learn as much as possible from you more experienced photographers. For the record, I went with a 4 stop Hitech ND filter.

I ran out to a local creek for some test shots, on a heavily overcast evening, and the CPL alone was more than enough to get shutter speeds of 4 seconds or more. Too long for my taste. Still, if its sunny on my trip and I shoot into mid-morning, I could see the ND coming into play. I head out tomorrow AM, so by next weekend I will try to comment on my results.

Thanks again everyone.
Jeff

Well here's a quick update. We had a wonderful trip with great weather and lots of sights to see. The waterfalls were running strong, thanks to some heavy rains a week prior to the trip.

As for filters, the polarizer rarely came off the lens and it produced some very nice results (I'll post some this weekend in ES&S). However, I never even used the new 4 stop ND filter (Phil - Your comment was right on). The falls were in enough shade early and late in the day, so that I found myself actually increasing the ISO to get the SS I wanted. I'm not a big fan of totally blurred water, so I was generally targeting no more than 1.5 seconds and often wanting 1/3 second.

What I learned: Shoot early and late in the day when lighting is favorable. The combination of ISO, aperature and optional polarizer give you enough flexibility to achieve SS of 1/3 to 2 seconds. If you really want a longer exposure, then the ND filter would come into play.

Thanks again for all the comments. They were a big factor in me having a successful trip!

Jeff your experience is exactly what I predicted. The 4 stop ND filter is a specialized filter that really is only useful in a small handful of situations.

I use two 9 stop NDX 400's and two polarizers