Using ND filters on D5500

[Karmann_65]

I had time recently to try out using ND filters for the first time. Looking out to sea was a big ship anchored up at a reasonable distance mid frame. My aim was to smooth out the water.

D5500 with Nikon 18-55 AF-P VR kit lens.

With the camera already set up on a steady tripod and remote shutter cable fitted I composed the shot in apperture priority mode and noted the settings. F11, ISO100 at 1/60 of a second.
Armed with a basic (cheap) ND filter kit, I then set the auto focus to manual using the camera internal menu setting and switched the camera itself to full manual mode on the top dial.
Ensuring F11, ISO100 in manual mode I then calculated the exposure for an 8 stop (non graduated) ND at 4 seconds.
Finally I covered the view finder with a cap and took the shot.

The result was a totally white image with nothing to see at all. Massively over exposed.

I know the problem will be something I've missed doing but am at a loss as to what that might be.

Any help would be much appreciated. TIA

 

[Fred Kingston_RIP]

Post the image here... 1. ISO is on auto and changed. 2. Some other auto feature kicked in... Let's see the EXIF data for the image...

 

[Karmann_65]

Foolishly I dumped the white image straight away as totally non recoverable. I only shoot in RAW (NEF) and use an old version or Lightroom which can get me out of some situations. This was so far gone I didn't even think to keep it. :dejection:
Auto ISO? Does auto ISO still work in full manual mode? I can check that when I get home because it's a setting I've definately not changed since. I'm away from the camera until tonight. Pretty sure it was/is fixed at ISO100 but I will check.
Low light noise reduction was at "normal" and VR was off. This was a daytime shot by the way.
After switching to full manual mode I'm sure I checked aperture, shutter speed and ISO before clicking the cable release. Would have been very remiss of me not to at that point.
I do wonder if there's some other auto feature kicked in but don't understand why it would allow such an over exposure. It's as if the ND filter had not been over the lens during the long exposure.

 

[Fred Kingston_RIP]

Auto ISO is independent of shooting Mode...IOW. Yes, auto ISO is active in Manual mode unless set otherwise.

Also, turn the High Noise Reduction OFF... You're shooting in RAW and any noise can better be reduced in post processing

 

[Horoscope Fish]

I had time recently to try out using ND filters for the first time. Looking out to sea was a big ship anchored up at a reasonable distance mid frame. My aim was to smooth out the water.

D5500 with Nikon 18-55 AF-P VR kit lens.

With the camera already set up on a steady tripod and remote shutter cable fitted I composed the shot in apperture priority mode and noted the settings. F11, ISO100 at 1/60 of a second.
Armed with a basic (cheap) ND filter kit, I then set the auto focus to manual using the camera internal menu setting and switched the camera itself to full manual mode on the top dial.
Ensuring F11, ISO100 in manual mode I then calculated the exposure for an 8 stop (non graduated) ND at 4 seconds.
Finally I covered the view finder with a cap and took the shot.

The result was a totally white image with nothing to see at all. Massively over exposed.

I know the problem will be something I've missed doing but am at a loss as to what that might be.

Any help would be much appreciated. TIA

Were you using an ND8 filter by any chance?

I ask because an ND8 filter is actually a three-stop reduction, not eight stops, as the nomenclature might have lead you to believe. To get an eight stop reduction you'd need to be using an ND256 which is a little uncommon, while ND8's are quite common. Here's a chart showing the nomenclature and f-stop reductions for ND filters up to eight stops. Notice how the ND number doubles for each increasing stop of light transmission blocked:

 

[Karmann_65]

Yes, it was an ND8. Not knowing otherwise, I assumed an ND8 was 8 stops and calculated accordingly.

These are the filters I got....
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B009GTM6H6/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o09_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I always knew they were cheap but knew nothing about the chart you've posted up. Thanks for that! Could go a long way to explaining my issue.

 

[Horoscope Fish]

Yes, it was an ND8. Not knowing otherwise, I assumed an ND8 was 8 stops and calculated accordingly.

These are the filters I got....
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B009GTM6H6/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o09_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I always knew they were cheap but knew nothing about the chart you've posted up. Thanks for that! Could go a long way to explaining my issue.

Confusing, isn't it? I have no idea where this naming/numbering convention came from, but it's the norm... Up to eight stops. It has nothing to do with the quality of your particular filters, it's just how ND Filters are labeled across the board.

Confusing things even more is that the next step up in density is not ND512 as the chart would suggest, but rather ND400 (ND400 = 9-stop reduction) and then it's ND1000 for a ten-stop reduction filter.

 

[Karmann_65]

OK. It's all beginning to make sense now. Sort of!

Since this new (to me) information and after a bit of reading, it seems that ND filters are something of a minefield.

P filters, Z filters, screw on and variable. Not to mention colour casts and vignetting.

I'm just looking to dip my toe in the water and want a general purpose filter that's dark enough to create a noticable effect when used.

 

[Horoscope Fish]

OK. It's all beginning to make sense now. Sort of!

Since this new (to me) information and after a bit of reading, it seems that ND filters are something of a minefield.

P filters, Z filters, screw on and variable. Not to mention colour casts and vignetting.

I'm just looking to dip my toe in the water and want a general purpose filter that's dark enough to create a noticable effect when used.

I understand. Truly. Seems like it should be a simple thing.

At this point, I suggest you simply avoid both Graduated and Variable ND filters, at least for now. My reasons are my own but let's keep it simple for the time being.

What filter you're going to need will depend on your shooting conditions and the effect you're trying to achieve. Breakthrough Filter (one of my favorite (if pricier!)) filter brands has this helpful guide for choosing an ND filter. It might help put you on track: ND Filter Buying Guide.

When it comes to what makes for a GOOD Neutral Density filter the single biggest thing is probably color-cast. What we WANT an ND filter to do is simply reduce the amount of light hitting the sensor. Unfortunately what actually HAPPENS, and this tends more to be the case with lower quality filters, is they introduce color we don't want (typically blue-ish/purple or they add additional "warmth" to the white-balance), vignetting or their density is not true in respect to their density-rating. The color-cast effect tends to get more pronounced as the filter-density increases and it can sometimes be a fair b--ch to correct for during post processing. Simply put, color-casts are best avoided.

Another site, FStoppers, tested several ND filters and this article/video is definitely worth checking out just to get an idea of what I'm talking about: FStoppers: Best Filter Test.

Based on what you have, I might suggest you try stacking the ND8 with the ND4. This would give you a five-stop reduction total. If you can stack all three you would have a six-stop reduction. If you can't stack filters I'm going to suggest you get a single ND64 filter that will fit your filter bracket.

If your bracket uses the common 100mm filters you could try this one: 100mm ND64.

 

[hark]

I'm just looking to dip my toe in the water and want a general purpose filter that's dark enough to create a noticable effect when used.

The ICE ND1000 (10-stop) is a decent neutral density filter that won't break the bank. It screws onto the front of your lens. When choosing an ND filter, buy the size that fits your lens with the largest size front filter threads. You can always use step-up rings to fit it on lenses that are smaller in diameter.

A 9 or 10 stop will work well. The thing is you can always raise your ISO if you find your shutter speed is too slow. If you do that, then you can shorten the length of time for the exposure. One problem with really long exposures is if you have trees swaying in the wind. A long exposure will really blur the branches. But like I said, you can compensate with increasing your ISO as well as your shutter speed to balance the time.

And if you have a circular polarizer, that might give you around 1 to 1.7 stops difference in speed so it's also an option if you don't have an ND filter at hand.

As far as color cast, the ICE filter might have a slight color cast that can be tweaked during post processing. When I used mine, I didn't notice any adverse affect in any way.

https://www.amazon.com/ND1000-Filte...ilter+10+stop&qid=1559831757&s=gateway&sr=8-3

 

[hark]

Confusing, isn't it? I have no idea where this naming/numbering convention came from, but it's the norm... Up to eight stops. It has nothing to do with the quality of your particular filters, it's just how ND Filters are labeled across the board.

Confusing things even more is that the next step up in density is not ND512 as the chart would suggest, but rather ND400 (ND400 = 9-stop reduction) and then it's ND1000 for a ten-stop reduction filter.

Not to throw a wrench into the discussion, but according to B&H's link for the ICE 10-stop ND filter, it's listed as a Neutral Density 3.0 filter as well as a 1000x filter factor. :eyetwitch:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1191690-REG/ice_ice_nd1000_77_77mm_ice_nd1000_solid.html

 

[Fred Kingston_RIP]

The filters you have will work. Just stack the 3 filters together in the holder... You'll notice you can insert 3 filters are the same time in "P" holder

ND2 + ND4 + ND8 = 6 stops calculate for the 6 stops... You're already on a tripod so you can reduce that 2 additional stops

 

[Horoscope Fish]

Not to throw a wrench into the discussion, but according to B&H's link for the ICE 10-stop ND filter, it's listed as a Neutral Density 3.0 filter as well as a 1000x filter factor. :eyetwitch:

Heh... That "3.0" in the description refers to the filters "Optical Density"; yet another unit of measurement I wasn't going to dive into. I probably should have since some manufacturers use that designation to describe their filters in lieu of the more common ND rating:
.....

 

[hark]

Heh... That "3.0" in the description refers to the filters "Optical Density"; yet another unit of measurement I wasn't going to dive into.

Lol - it makes my head hurt. According to your chart, the Optical Density varies from manufacturer to manufacturer. ::what:: Yet another wrench tossed in! :beguiled:

 

[Horoscope Fish]

Lol - it makes my head hurt. ...

Yeah... Mine too.

 

[Fred Kingston_RIP]

Yeah... Mine too.

That's why I always recommend that cheap Cokin knockoff set on Amazon to new photographers when they ask about filters...

 

[Karmann_65]

Lol - it makes my head hurt. According to your chart, the Optical Density varies from manufacturer to manufacturer. ::what:: Yet another wrench tossed in! :beguiled:

Blimey! Your head hurts? I almost wish I hadn't asked. Only kidding.

I really do appreciate you all taking the time to help me out here.

For the moment I'm going to keep things simple. Firstly I'll try stacking the ND's I already have but expect quite a loss of quality by doing so (did I mention they were cheap? LOL).
If that doesn't bring any joy then I'll look for a screw on 10 stopper that fits my biggest diameter lens (good tip Hark) or a P filter size 10 stoper that will fit all.
I do have another question about P filters though. Are they more likely to leak light into the camera than an intimate fitting screw on filter or is it not really an issue?

 

[Fred Kingston_RIP]

No...they won't leak light... There are 3 tracks in the holder... just be sure when you use it that you use the track closest to the camera side when adding the filters...

Incidentally, if you're using them to shoot water scenes... you can add a polarizing filter and that'll add 2-stops also... just screw the polarizer on then add the Cokin holder onto that...

Here's a link... there are probably several more... for a single ND1000 8 stop filter...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Haida-Slim...m=333187466726&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851

 

[hark]

Blimey! Your head hurts? I almost wish I hadn't asked. Only kidding.

I really do appreciate you all taking the time to help me out here.

For the moment I'm going to keep things simple. Firstly I'll try stacking the ND's I already have but expect quite a loss of quality by doing so (did I mention they were cheap? LOL).
If that doesn't bring any joy then I'll look for a screw on 10 stopper that fits my biggest diameter lens (good tip Hark) or a P filter size 10 stoper that will fit all.
I do have another question about P filters though. Are they more likely to leak light into the camera than an intimate fitting screw on filter or is it not really an issue?

No...they won't leak light... There are 3 tracks in the holder... just be sure when you use it that you use the track closest to the camera side when adding the filters...

Incidentally, if you're using them to shoot water scenes... you can add a polarizing filter and that'll add 2-stops also... just screw the polarizer on then add the Cokin holder onto that...

Here's a link... there are probably several more... for a single ND1000 8 stop filter...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Haida-Slim...m=333187466726&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851

I have a Cokin filter set that I haven't used in a long time but really should put it into use. I have several graduated ND filters that are colored to enhance the sky. If I remember correctly, there is an optional hood available that should prevent any light leaks. Not sure what type of set you have or are considering.