 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / November 2004Cokin filters
Hi all, as I see my lens collection growing, I am discovering that each lens I own has a different filter diameter. I have all my lenses with a UV filter on, but I only have my old (and a bit tired) 58mm CPL and need a 50mm, a 72mm and in the near future a 67mm CPL. I do not have any other filters, but I thing skylight, blue and orange could be useful. Now, to buy good quality CPLs for these diameters (and who knows what will come) will cost me much and I was thinking about Cokin system. Does anyone have any experience? Is it worth it? thanks a lot!!! -- dimitris > Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > and I was thinking about Cokin system. Does anyone have any experience? Is > it worth it? What about buying 77s and using step-down (up?) rings? B Hi Bruce, thanks for the answer. I thought about that, but then I would still have to buy two CPLs for example to cover the 50-58 and 67-72 range respectively, shouldn't I? I do not know how safe and efficient is to use a step ring like 50-77... if there is one... Further, I do not know how efficient step rings are, I never had any. for example, I wonder, should I keep a step ring on the lens all the time? whether I use the filter or not? I do not know if this is right or not... AFAIK cokin filters only need a ring for each lens that can stay on the lens all the time and just attach the adaptwer and filter... > Hi Bruce, > > thanks for the answer. I thought about that, but then I would still have to > buy two CPLs for example to cover the 50-58 and 67-72 range respectively, > shouldn't I? I do not know how safe and efficient is to use a step ring like > 50-77... if there is one... Perfectly. It looks a bit awkward, but probably no more so than the cokin things. In reality, you won't use just /one/ step ring, but will have several and add them as you need to get from your lens size up to the 77. > Further, I do not know how efficient step rings > are, I never had any. for example, I wonder, should I keep a step ring on > the lens all the time? Efficient? they're a piece of metal. They might get in the way of attaching a hood, but they have no optical effect (at least the ones that increase the size of the filter rings). They tend to flare out sufficiently fast that they don't cause vignetting, too. > whether I use the filter or not? I do not know if > this is right or not... AFAIK cokin filters only need a ring for each lens > that can stay on the lens all the time and just attach the adaptwer and > filter... It's a filter, you pull the filter you want out and then any step down rings you need to attach it. Filters really shouldn't be on the lens all the time, and I doubt you want to have the cokin crap on the front of a camera. B > Does anyone have any experience? Is > it worth it? Everyone will have their own opinions, of course; it depends on how you intend to used them. I used to sell the Cokin filters in my shop, and of course tried them myself. For me, at least, they were more appropriate for special effects in the studio than general use out in the field. Too bulky, cumbersome, and "fiddly." And, while they're GOOD acrylic, they're still plastic. (At least the flats were good. The multi-image prism thingies were just awful.) If I were you I'd just bite the bullet and get your common filters in the appropriate sizes. About the only filter I would use with a Cokin filter holder is a ND Gradual filter, so I could adjust the graduation. Otherwise I would use glass filters with step rings. I've heard that the Cokin ND Grads are grey instead of neutral, but I've heard that Hitech makes good ND Grads, and can be found here: http://www.2filter.com/prices/htpackages.html Get the P series to avoid vignetting. You can get glass ND Grads, but they are expensive. Cody, http://community-2.webtv.net/AnOvercomer02/PhotographyLinks On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 10:57:10 -0600, AnOvercomer02 wrote: > About the only filter I would use with a Cokin filter holder is a ND > Gradual filter, so I could adjust the graduation. Otherwise I would use > glass filters with step rings. > I've heard that the Cokin ND Grads are grey instead of neutral, but I've > heard that Hitech makes good ND Grads, and can be found here: Okm what is the difference between gray and neutral? A neutral would attenuate all visible wavelengths equally whereas a grey would attenuate only the colours that make up gray, ie dark white, i.e. all colours. QED Gray = neutral. Am i nissing something? (Peter Chant) wrote: Okm what is the difference between gray and neutral? A neutral would attenuate all visible wavelengths equally whereas a grey would attenuate only the colours that make up gray, ie dark white, i.e. all colours. QED Gray = neutral. Am i nissing something? ==========================I am not sure what the difference is, I've just read that there is one. If there is a difference, I think that it is probably not much. Cody, http://community-2.webtv.net/AnOvercomer02/PhotographyLinks On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:09:07 -0600, AnOvercomer02 wrote: > I am not sure what the difference is, I've just read that there is one. > If there is a difference, I think that it is probably not much. Perhaps neutral filters are neutral colours. Hmm, a magnolia grad. Urgh. :-) (Peter Chant) wrote: Okm what is the difference between gray and neutral? A neutral would attenuate all visible wavelengths equally whereas a grey would attenuate only the colours that make up gray, ie dark white, i.e. all colours. QED Gray = neutral. Am i nissing something? ============================ I am not sure what the difference is, I've just read that there is one. If there is a difference, I think that it is probably not much. NDs are gray. It's the same thing. > (Peter Chant) wrote: > Okm what is the difference between gray and neutral? My Cokin "gray" filters have a very slight color cast. Not enough to matter but they are not truly neutral. My non Cokin neutral grads are neutral.  SignatureSorry but due to spam I shall not provide a valid e-mail address. Please reply to the group. >> (Peter Chant) wrote: >> Okm what is the difference between gray and neutral? > My Cokin "gray" filters have a very slight color cast. Not enough to matter > but they are not truly neutral. My non Cokin neutral grads are neutral. When they were designed I suspect that the aim was that there were no colour casts. Maybe neutral grad sounds more expensive than gray/grad. We have not seen a logical explaination. It might be marketing. Pete > Okm what is the difference between gray and neutral? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I am not sure what the difference is, I've just read that there is one. > If there is a difference, I think that it is probably not much. Occasionally hear that Cokin neutrals have a slight magenta cast. I shot a couple test images (no filter, dark part of grad, light part of grad and both together) on Sensia 100. If there is a magenta cast (or any cast) I can't see it projected, under a loupe or scanned. Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- [SI] rulz: http://www.aliasimages.com/si/rulz.html -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. > Alan Browne wrote: > Occasionally hear that Cokin neutrals have a slight magenta cast. I > shot a couple test images (no filter, dark part of grad, light part > of grad and both together) on Sensia 100. If there is a magenta cast > (or any cast) I can't see it projected, under a loupe or scanned. This leads me to a general question I've always had. Are we sometimes defeating ourselves looking for the absolute best possible when the absolute best possible may not even be noticable? I think I fall into this trap sometimes and wonder what others think. SignatureThe best part about having kids is making them. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.