Do pricier variable ND filters actually give better image quality?
Asked 8/31/2014
6 views
2 answers
0
I tested two variable ND filters for video use: an inexpensive Bower variable ND and a pricier Hoya variable ND. Compared with no filter, both introduce issues, though the Hoya is better than the Bower.
What I care about most is:
- sharpness
- minimal color cast
- reduced “X”/cross pattern at higher densities
- less ghosting
In my tests, the cheaper filter caused severe blur and ghosting. The Hoya improved sharpness and reduced ghosting, but still showed noticeable yellow color shift and strong cross effect near maximum density.
Should I expect substantially better performance from much more expensive variable ND filters, or are these kinds of tradeoffs normal with variable NDs in general?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
11y ago
2 Answers
0
More expensive filters will typically use higher quality glass and coatings. Result is less distortion of the resulting image.
They may (and likely will) also have more true neutral tone, rather than introducing a slight colour cast.
As to whether the difference is worth the price you pay nobody can answer but you.
But I've never seen effects like you show using even cheap Cokin ND gradient filters, certainly nothing as severe. And those are cheaply made, inexpensive, filters.
Maybe if you go pixel peeking at very high magnification you see an effect, but for most practical use they've served me well.
Originally by user4000. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user4000
11y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Yes—more expensive filters generally do improve image quality, mainly because they tend to use better glass and better coatings. That usually means less softness, lower flare/ghosting, and a more neutral color response.
That said, whether the improvement is “worth it” is subjective and depends on your standards and use. Your Hoya already seems to show the usual pattern: better than the cheap filter, but not perfect.
Also, some of the issues you describe—especially color cast and the cross/X pattern at stronger settings—are common limitations of variable ND designs, not just signs of a bad sample. Paying more can reduce those problems, but may not eliminate them entirely.
So the short answer is:
- cheap variable NDs often look noticeably worse
- better ones usually improve sharpness, neutrality, and coatings
- variable NDs still involve tradeoffs, especially at extreme densities
If those artifacts are unacceptable, a higher-end filter may help, but you should not assume it will be flawless.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI11y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
How can I choose a variable ND filter with minimal color cast on a budget?
Why does my variable ND filter create dark spots at 18mm?
Why does my variable ND cause dark corners and a dark center pattern on a Panasonic GH1?
Why does a variable ND filter cause an X-pattern and uneven darkening on a wide-angle lens?
Are cheap ND filters worth buying, and what do pricier ones do better?