Interesting. When I see videos like this, it makes me wonder if there is a visual difference caused by compensating for the exposure loss when adding the ND. For example if you are using 4 stops of ND to then compare a side by side, are you using aperture, Shutter speed, light power or ( hope not ) ISO to get them to the same exposure? It seems to me that a Sensor hit with more light might have characteristics change in the image. Not sure how to test and show that though. Something has to change. I wished I had bought a good set a long time ago, as I find that the more you understand exposure, the more you find that you need ND. Even indoors, if a window needs to be show outside and the dynamic range is not enough, I put on 1 or 2 stops of ND and add more light to the indoors to make a smaller ratio between light sources to fit in within the DR. I do like the magnetic idea as well. I would like a set of just static ND that you can place on top of each other magnetically.
For any beginners why may read this thread, If you’ve added ND and use aperture to compensate you’ll see a more shallow depth of field, there’s an example of this in the “what ND filters do” section. If you use shutter speed you’ll see more motion blur. As for ISO, for example with the BMPCC6K (I mention this camera specifically as I own it and can speak to this honestly) it’s not at all uncommon to go above native ISO as that will open up the dynamic range in the highlights. 4 stops wouldn’t be realistic in this example but if I went from native of 400 to 800 and use 1 stop of ND I would gain 1 full extra stop of highlights so long as I don’t mind losing that stop from the shadows so even with ISO there are benefits. As for adjusting light levels directly, as you’ve mentions this is useful for balancing a scenes dynamic range and the only other real difference would be the size of a persons pupil. That may seem like a small difference but I think it’s critical. As for nuance differences cause by the sensor receiving different levels of light I’d struggle to see why there would be differences and they’d be very hard to assess due to all the other major differences mentioned above, that said I am the furthest thing from a sensor expert! It is an interesting question though!
@@FilmResolved I was just referring to what would be alternative ways that may or may not, alter the test results when adding an ND using all the ways to get back to middle grey exposure. Wasn't suggesting any method as better or worse, but thinking that since I have never tested them, that they might change the results a little depending on which was used. Especially sharpness - lenses seem to have their sweet spots at different apertures. So if that was used to change the exposure after adding the ND, then it may change the sharpness of the lens as well and the ND may not be changing at all.
Did I say one was better than the other? 🧐 😂 you’re absolutely correct about the lens sharpness but I though we were talking about how the sensor was reacting.
@@FilmResolved yes, exactly. I was just listing all the ways to change the exposure to do the test to get the exposure to match to the ND version. I actually have never tested it and was wondering out loud as to if it changed anything.
Thanks for the great review. Your conclusion has put a wrench to my instantly buying this filter system since I LOVE my Tiffen 1/4 Black Pro-Mist
Interesting. When I see videos like this, it makes me wonder if there is a visual difference caused by compensating for the exposure loss when adding the ND. For example if you are using 4 stops of ND to then compare a side by side, are you using aperture, Shutter speed, light power or ( hope not ) ISO to get them to the same exposure? It seems to me that a Sensor hit with more light might have characteristics change in the image. Not sure how to test and show that though. Something has to change.
I wished I had bought a good set a long time ago, as I find that the more you understand exposure, the more you find that you need ND. Even indoors, if a window needs to be show outside and the dynamic range is not enough, I put on 1 or 2 stops of ND and add more light to the indoors to make a smaller ratio between light sources to fit in within the DR. I do like the magnetic idea as well. I would like a set of just static ND that you can place on top of each other magnetically.
For any beginners why may read this thread, If you’ve added ND and use aperture to compensate you’ll see a more shallow depth of field, there’s an example of this in the “what ND filters do” section. If you use shutter speed you’ll see more motion blur. As for ISO, for example with the BMPCC6K (I mention this camera specifically as I own it and can speak to this honestly) it’s not at all uncommon to go above native ISO as that will open up the dynamic range in the highlights. 4 stops wouldn’t be realistic in this example but if I went from native of 400 to 800 and use 1 stop of ND I would gain 1 full extra stop of highlights so long as I don’t mind losing that stop from the shadows so even with ISO there are benefits. As for adjusting light levels directly, as you’ve mentions this is useful for balancing a scenes dynamic range and the only other real difference would be the size of a persons pupil. That may seem like a small difference but I think it’s critical. As for nuance differences cause by the sensor receiving different levels of light I’d struggle to see why there would be differences and they’d be very hard to assess due to all the other major differences mentioned above, that said I am the furthest thing from a sensor expert! It is an interesting question though!
@@FilmResolved I was just referring to what would be alternative ways that may or may not, alter the test results when adding an ND using all the ways to get back to middle grey exposure.
Wasn't suggesting any method as better or worse, but thinking that since I have never tested them, that they might change the results a little depending on which was used.
Especially sharpness - lenses seem to have their sweet spots at different apertures. So if that was used to change the exposure after adding the ND, then it may change the sharpness of the lens as well and the ND may not be changing at all.
Did I say one was better than the other? 🧐 😂 you’re absolutely correct about the lens sharpness but I though we were talking about how the sensor was reacting.
@@FilmResolved yes, exactly. I was just listing all the ways to change the exposure to do the test to get the exposure to match to the ND version. I actually have never tested it and was wondering out loud as to if it changed anything.
Fair enough, I’ll stick With my original answer then. How’s the channel coming along?