ND filters for Canon 17-55 2.8 ?

L

Lkorver

Well-known member
Sorry, new to the ND filter world. Would it make more sense to go with two .6's or one .9, or one of each? I'm just not sure how much light they will cut for outdoor shoots. thanks!
 
Or if you want to go cheaper, I got a circular polarizer and a linear one and stacked them together for the same thing.
 
Do yourself a favor and just get dedicated ND's. It will save you a lot of headache and exposure woes. Faders tend to be tricky in an even distribution of the intensity, sometimes leaving certain areas of the frame darker if not set perfectly, and stacking pola's gets expensive and clunky, plus what if you don't want the effect of a pola?

Match the mm size of your lens(es) and consider a set, .3(1 stop), .6(2 stops), .9(3 stops) and a 1.2(4 stops). Generally you can skip the 1.2 as stacking your n9 and n3 will give you the same effect and you'll save some money. This will cover your range completely giving you full flexibility and exposure compensation/control.

Here is what I got for my 24-70mm-

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/58591-REG/Tiffen_82ND3_82mm_Neutral_Density_ND_.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/58655-REG/Tiffen_82ND6_82mm_Neutral_Density_ND_.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/58717-REG/Tiffen_82ND9_82mm_Neutral_Density_ND_.html

From a filmmaking/cinematography point of view, the general rule of thumb is to use a mattebox with square filters, 4x4, 4x5, 6x6, etc. thus allowing you to use all of your lenses without having to buy dedicated matching glass for each lens, but many of the shooters here use their cameras in guerrilla situations or just don't have or can't afford a mattebox system, so thats when the screw on filters become convenient. Its different for each persons needs, obviously.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top