Singh Ray worth the money

Planning a mostly landscape trip for the fall and am thinking of adding a few extra filters. Are the singh ray LB Warming filters any better than others on the market? I have a ND filter and a polarizer so is this filter worth the expense? SHould I be looking at something else, like the Cokin Z series??

Thanks in advance

Lindy - Are you shooting digital or film? If digital, raw or JPG? If you're shooting digital raw, a warming filter essentially does nothing. It's incredibly easy to do the same thing by changing the white balance or adding a filter effect later (amongst many other possibilities). If you're shooting JPG it might have an effect, but the auto-white balance of your camera may very well try to cancel it out. (That would also hold true for raw, but you'd have the chance to set the WB later.)

Now if you're talking about a warming polarizer, you've essentially combined the two. In that case, if the warming part is dependent on the polarization, then that's a bit different - since polarization based changes need to be made by the filter and can't really be reproduced digitally.

I say, "No," based on experience with S-R and others. It seems like S-R filters are a religion with some people. I've tried them, and I don't see any difference at all. It won't surprise me if people sing their praises here.

Depending upon the ND you have, you may want another one, too. For example, I have a ND 3-stop and a ND 6-stop. I've used them alone and in multiple combinations with the polarizer.

If you use screw-on filters, you wont have to worry about Cokin Z vs P. PS makes it so easy to blend exposures, I stopped using Grads except for very rare occasions. Then I switched my ND's and polarizer to screw-on's, which eliminates the need for a holder.

I agree with Dave completely on his comments about no need for a warming filter.

Interesting topic. I used to take my P and Z sized Singh-rays everywhere. They are well-made optically, no question there (not comparing to anything else, but SR's don't stink), but I would get frustrated with the straight line problem. Mountains aren't straight and often I'd hold it too high or low or get a thumb in the shot. I was very close to getting the Lee 4x6 holder but that was even MORE money. Then I tried Photomatix, using 6-8 exposures about a stop apart, and discovered that the disgusting silver-washed HDR look with halos that you can measure with a wood ruler was NOT intrinsic to Photomatix, it was just a preset that people chose to use. When I saw how REAL the HDR imagery was coming out with the right tweaks (and having fought with HDR in PS CS4 at the time), the move to Photomatix was a no-brainer. I don't used SR ND grads anymore for stills.

So years ago when I discovered that UV filters were nothing but psycho flare-causing warts that were causing more problems in the image than helping, I ditched them for a good lens hood. Contrast spared, problem solved. Then I ditched ND Grads for Photomatix (used correctly, lol), problem solved again. I do keep two filters types in my bag: 3-stop ND for shooting at f1.2 on a sunny day and for motion blur, and a Kaesemann CPL, because there is nothing better known to man to remove glare off of foliage and water like our beloved CPLs, IMBO. I like B+W filters because they are broadcast grade and use real brass rings which don't get hung in the threads like aluminum rings do.

So there's my 2 cents (at least for now!). By all means, fire back if you have come to other conclusions!

Paul

PS: IMBO = In my biased opinion

Just to clarify what Paul said... He was referring to graduated neutral density (GND) filters in the first paragraph.

Thanks for the info. I don't have Nik software or Photomatrix software - so,does that change the equation? I have read lots of Darwin Wigget's info where he says he can't live without the filters - some indication that IQ is better optically than through software??

Thanks for the info. I don't have Nik software or Photomatrix software - so,does that change the equation? I have read lots of Darwin Wigget's info where he says he can't live without the filters - some indication that IQ is better optically than through software??

You don't need Nik or Photomatix. The Mask pane in CS5 has a feather slider that goes up to 250. Very easy to use for blending multiple exposures. Doesn't degrade IQ at all.

" I have read lots of Darwin Wigget's info where he says he can't live without the filters-some indication that IQ is better optically than through software?? "

I suspect that it's a personal preference thing. IQ is definitely not better using certain filters (warming, cooling, etc.) than in software, as any piece of glass placed in front of your lens degrades IQ to some degree or another. I would save your money and warm things up a bit in post-processing. That way you have a choice of whether you even need/want it and at what strength you prefer. The only filters I carry are ND (not GND) and polarizing filters.
Save your $$$ for better lenses, which can definitely improve IQ.

There are several topics on here discussing GND filters versus manually blending exposures versus HDR software. Some people use all three, and it really can be a personal preference or a situational thing.

ND filters and polarizers can't always be replicated in software though - so in those cases you should be thinking about filters for sure.

These kind of things are always a personal preference. It is my personal preference to use graduated filters Lindy. I have used 84mm Singh Ray filters extensively and their quality is very good to excellent in my opinion. I have used the SR warming polarizer as well as their color combo warming polarizer and they are both exceptional but expensive. I prefer using grads over exposure blending but have done both but I really don't like spending time in front of a computer for processing. I also recently got back into MF film (not giving up digital), and needed to move up to 100mm wide filters (My MF lenses have a 95mm diameter). I would have loved to stay with SR, but to replace my whole set including reverse grads, normal grads hard and soft was out of my budget range. I went with Hitech 100mm filters since I did use them on a photo workshop with Ian C. They also seem fine IMO and did fit my budget. I have only used them for a short time though.

Another thing I should mention is that when I sold my 84mm SR filters, they certainly held their value. That says something to me. Also, as you increase the density of the filter, there is more of a color shift with any filter system, some worse than others. I don't think Cokin filters come anywhere close to quality of Singh Ray, Lee, or Hitech. Just my opinion. I have also used Photmatix and Nik Color Efex and the results are very different. Having done film for 30 years before going digital, I prefer capture in camera as opposed to software. Again, a personal preference.