I'm considering getting a small setup of Graduated Neutral Density Filters to deal with exposures made along shorelines with moving water. I've tried blending multiple exposures but with the moving water this has proved difficult.

I have a few questions below about filter systems that I would like to get some feedback on before moving ahead with my purchase.

1. I'm considering two different systems the Cokin Z Pro series and the Lee holder. I have not been able to find much information about the Lee holder and am wondering what the pluses and minuses are between the two.
2. I am either considering the Lee 100x150 filters or the Singh Ray. Is there much of a difference?
3. In addition to the GND I will also need to use a polarizing filter to cut down on rock reflections. I currently have a screw on B+W filter will I be able to use this at the same time or will have to get a polarizing filter that fits in the holder?

Any additional information that might help would be appreciated.

I plan to use this system with my 5DmkII and 17-40 and 24-105 lenses both which are 77mm.

Thanks, Aaron.

I have used both the Lee and Cokin Z systems and much prefer the Lee. The Lee is just better designed, built and more configurable.

In addition to the holder (called the Foundation Kit), you will need a 77mm adapter ring, which screws on to the lens and to which you attach the holder. I strongly suggest you get the wide angle adapter ring (instead of the standard ring) to lessen the chance of vignetting at 17mm.

I use Lee 100x150 filters, which are really excellent, as are Singh-Ray filters. HiTech filters are also popular and less expensive. Do NOT buy Cokin filters, as they are not color-neutral. I would suggest initially purchasing 2-stop soft and a 3-stop hard GND's and build from there.

There are several ways to deal with a CPL. The simplest is to use your existing 77mm screw-in CPL and just hand-hold the GND filter in front of it (obviously easier if you are shooting from a tripod). If you wish to use the holder, you will need to purchase a front thread adapter ring, which mounts on the front of the holder and to which you then attach a 105mm CPL. Lee sells a 105mm CPL, but it is more expensive than the B+W Kaeseman that I use. You can eventually purchase one of several available hoods, which also attach to the front thread adapter ring. Perhaps the best (and most expensive solution) is to buy the P105 Wide Angle Hood, which has two integrated slots for regular filters and a retaining ring for the 105mm CPL. This hood attaches directly to the WA adapter ring and eliminates the need for the holder.

I hope this helps.

I've been using the Lee Holder System with 4X6 Singh Ray GNDs for awhile now and I'm extremely happy with it. But you will need to get the 77mm ring adapter for your lenses, if you B+W has front threads the adapter should work with it.

KFG1 wrote:
But you will need to get the 77mm ring adapter for your lenses, if you B+W has front threads the adapter should work with it.

Very difficult to work this way, with the CPL before the holder.

gearhead5 wrote:
KFG1 wrote:
But you will need to get the 77mm ring adapter for your lenses, if you B+W has front threads the adapter should work with it.

Very difficult to work this way, with the CPL before the holder.

Not sure why you think that it would be a problem. But I've done it before with a B+W Kaesemann that had front threads and is was not an issue, the shots came out fine

KFG1 wrote:

Not sure why you think that it would be a problem. But I've done it before with a B+W Kaesemann that had front threads and is was not an issue, the shots came out fine

It's a problem because you have the holder outside of the the CPL, making it difficult to tun the CPL because there is so little space between the holder and the adapter ring. This is especially true with the wide angle adapter. Also, vignetting becomes a real issue because the holder is further away from the lens.

Thanks for the feedback everyone. Does anyone have any specific comparisons between Lee and Singh Ray filters. There is a reasonable price difference and would like to know if there are any noticeable difference between the two. My main concern is color casts.

Lee & Singh Ray+++

I'm fairly new at using GNDs, but I have two Lee GNDs (2-stop hard/3-stop soft) and a Singh-Ray 3-stop Reverse GND. I detect no color casts with using any of them and have been very happy with the results I obtain.

a word of info on the use of the Z pro holder. if you are shooting FF it is limited to 20mm w/o vignetting. the Lee holder is designed differently in the WA adapter ring with allows use down to 16mm with only minimal vignetting at certain times.

gearhead5 wrote:
KFG1 wrote:

Not sure why you think that it would be a problem. But I've done it before with a B+W Kaesemann that had front threads and is was not an issue, the shots came out fine

It's a problem because you have the holder outside of the the CPL, making it difficult to tun the CPL because there is so little space between the holder and the adapter ring. This is especially true with the wide angle adapter. Also, vignetting becomes a real issue because the holder is further away from the lens.


IMHO neither of these is much of an issue that can't be easily overcame

KFG1 wrote:
gearhead5 wrote:
KFG1 wrote:

Not sure why you think that it would be a problem. But I've done it before with a B+W Kaesemann that had front threads and is was not an issue, the shots came out fine

It's a problem because you have the holder outside of the the CPL, making it difficult to tun the CPL because there is so little space between the holder and the adapter ring. This is especially true with the wide angle adapter. Also, vignetting becomes a real issue because the holder is further away from the lens.


IMHO neither of these is much of an issue that can't be easily overcame

OK, perhaps this will help. The idea with the holder is to get it as close to the lens as possible in order to avoid vignetting. This is why the wide angle adapter is preferable to the standard adapter (think of it as a "slim" adapter). Now, what you are suggesting is to then stick a fat ND filter between the lens and the adapter, thereby negating any advantage of the wide angle adapter and actually moving the holder much further away from the lens than even the standard adapter would, causing vignetting. I would be interested in knowing how this can be "easily overcome".

gearhead5 wrote:
KFG1 wrote:
gearhead5 wrote:
KFG1 wrote:

Not sure why you think that it would be a problem. But I've done it before with a B+W Kaesemann that had front threads and is was not an issue, the shots came out fine

It's a problem because you have the holder outside of the the CPL, making it difficult to tun the CPL because there is so little space between the holder and the adapter ring. This is especially true with the wide angle adapter. Also, vignetting becomes a real issue because the holder is further away from the lens.


IMHO neither of these is much of an issue that can't be easily overcame

OK, perhaps this will help. The idea with the holder is to get it as close to the lens as possible in order to avoid vignetting. This is why the wide angle adapter is preferable to the standard adapter (think of it as a "slim" adapter). Now, what you are suggesting is to then stick a fat ND filter between the lens and the adapter, thereby negating any advantage of the wide angle adapter and actually moving the holder much further away from the lens than even the standard adapter would, causing vignetting. I would be interested in knowing how this can be "easily overcome".

Vignetting can be corrected in post processing with Photoshop or with other plug-ins, so to me it's just not an issue, I do it at work all the time. I think we can agree to disagree on this thread....have a nice weekend

The lee holder is a much better design. I was worried about scratching my grads with the cokin holder. My preference is also the singh Ray filters. I can even use the 4x6 grads on my 95mm thread sized 8x10 lens.

never works out quite right as having the real deal

KFG1 wrote:

Vignetting can be corrected in post processing with Photoshop or with other plug-ins, so to me it's just not an issue, I do it at work all the time. I think we can agree to disagree on this thread....have a nice weekend

IMO, one always gets better results by using the system as intended and getting it right in the camera, rather than having to try to correct in post.