[Paul B]

Its now only 3 weeks until we leave for the next road trip and predictably I haven't managed to get around to sorting a few things I've been meaning to buy for quite some time; filters and a (better) tripod.

Filters seem to be a bit of a pain (mainly in the wallet) given my wide angle lens is the Canon 17-40 with a 77mm filter thread, and it sits upon a FF body.

Speaking to Harrisons, they sell filter Cokin P (£40) and Z filter kits (£140), the former of which I've been advised will hard vignette at the wide  end. Switching between P and Z costs an extra 25 f*ck alls and I wonder if its worth it for the extra 3mm of wideness I'll gain (likely so).

Obviously there are other alternatives (Hitech?) which come in 85 or 100mm offerings but I'm assuming these will have the same issues with respect to hard vignetting etc.

They also hinted that they believe Cokin Z and Lee filters come from the same factory as when supply fails for one, its the same for the other and that the optical quality of the Z series is not only better than the P but by implication similar to Lee. Any comments (from other fools that scrutinize things at 200%, I am trying to stop)? Are the systems interchangeable to a certain degree?

The next issue is a decent tripod and head. I'm a bit miffed that I failed to be decisive and buy the Amazon black friday Manfrotto. Ideally I want to spend as little as possible without meaning that I need to buy again in a years time. For value for money and reviews I've been looking at the Red Snapper 4 section alloy tripod (which gets high praise on another forum) and likely their beefier ball-head (~£150). Is this a bad idea?
http://www.redsnapperuk.com/camera-accessories/RS-324_Alloy_4_Section_Tripod.html
(it has the wrong product image, essentially it is the same with alloy legs instead of Carbon).

Harrisons suggested that for the camera+lens combo above I may get away with one of the Manfrotto travel tripods (if I was happy with their limited height) like the manfrotto mk394-h. They look too flimsy to me.

Obviously the opportunity exists to buy once in the US but not living out of a van makes collection from anything other than a store complex.

As ever, thanks for taking the time to read this.

[SA Chris]

Not sure about filter quality; depends on what filters you are wanting to use and how many ND, Grad etc? and if you want to stack them? I don't think there is much between Lee and Cokin TBH, you will need to review geeky tests to get a better idea.

You can get wide angle adaptors for the Lee system to minimise vignetting, they are expensive though, and it might be worth comparing costs for one against the number of larger filters and system you will need to buy otherwise.

From a tripod point of view Bestbuy stores are everywhere and you can check (and possibly order) stock at a certain store ready for you to collect. This will save you a bit of luggage weight flying out and you may be able to pick up a similar tripod for dollars what you would pay in pounds.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Cameras-Camcorder-Accessories/Camera-Tripods/abcat0410045.c?id=abcat0410045

[Paul B]

This will save you a bit of luggage weight flying out and you may be able to pick up a similar tripod for dollars what you would pay in pounds.

You say this but for instance the Manfrotto I mentioned above is pretty much identical in price (and ditto with the 190 series legs from Black Friday). It does still save on luggage weight.

[dave]

I'd be surprised if Lee makes Cokin filters, although Calumet has sold Lees rebranded as Calumet in the past. Cokin aren't so much cheaper so I'd just get Lees, or even find some second hand.

I wouldn't rule out P-sized filters though. My old sigma zoom was 77mm thread and wider view than your 17mm and it was fine. I've got a sawn off holder and rings you could try. If you do go this route look at Hitechs.

[Paul B]

I wouldn't rule out P-sized filters though. My old sigma zoom was 77mm thread and wider view than your 17mm and it was fine. I've got a sawn off holder and rings you could try. If you do go this route look at Hitechs.

I guess the difference is the sawn of holder. Hell, I'm happy with blu-tack if its going to get the job done. Or not buying a kit and just going for less filters (which?).

TBH - I haven't a clue if I'm likely to need to stack them (but I'd imagine soft grads are what I'll be after). To this date I've just tripod'd the camera and fired off two shots (one with a -2EV). A quick graduated layer mask and I've got quite a lot of room for manoeuvre in not only the placement of the grad, but the transition and even the exposure (more so than just a single exposure).

Dave, thanks for the offer but I'm seriously running out of spare time.

[Johnny Brown]

I used Cokin A with my OM system for years and was happy... until I took a brick of just out Velvia 100 to Canada and the combo turned the skies brown.

Buying a Lee kit a few years later was a big decision but not one I've regretted. With both filters and tripods it is worth breaking the bank, as otherwise you'll ending up starting again at some point. Last time I checked Cokin Z were dearer than Lee anyway.

The polariser is the big cost so do some research on that and compatibility first. I went with a big 102mm? not-Lee-but-thinner-and-cheaper polariser that screws onto the front of a Lee kit. If the Cokin Z is anything like the A and P it will go in a slot at that back of the holder, which is neat but means you can't use it anyhow else. To spread the cost I bought the polariser first and then just used blu-tac to attach. You can do a lot with blu-tac.

So I'd either man up and buy a Lee kit, or buy a Cokin P kit and some blutac.

Seems to be a lot of choice on tripods nowadays, I'm not up on all the new brands. I'd aim to buy a really good light (ie carbon) tripod which will serve you as a travel 'pod for many years. It won't be that tall but neither are you. I wouldn't bother trying to get one you think will do everything - it won't.

[dave]

When I used Cokins I was OK with the 2stop one, but the 3 stop one was dodgy. Stacking them together was like shooting through a quality street brazil nut wrapper.

[Paul B]

The polariser is the big cost so do some research on that and compatibility first. I went with a big 102mm? not-Lee-but-thinner-and-cheaper polariser that screws onto the front of a Lee kit. If the Cokin Z is anything like the A and P it will go in a slot at that back of the holder, which is neat but means you can't use it anyhow else. To spread the cost I bought the polariser first and then just used blu-tac to attach. You can do a lot with blu-tac.

I've already got a (slim) screw in polariser, I know it'll be a pain using this with the filter kit on the front but its one I'll have to live with. The Cokin 7 set is £140, do you know of anywhere selling Lee cheeper?

Seems to be a lot of choice on tripods nowadays, I'm not up on all the new brands. I'd aim to buy a really good light (ie carbon) tripod which will serve you as a travel 'pod for many years. It won't be that tall but neither are you. I wouldn't bother trying to get one you think will do everything - it won't.

Tell me about it. I haven't a clue where to start, initially I'd ruled out carbon as being too much $.

[dave]

A carbon brand which is rated as pretty good is Feisol, they have a UK distributor too. I was going to get one before I noticed a new Gitzo at the time from Harrisons with a rebate was only £50 more (at the time). Won't be many going second hand though as they are fairly new. Also I think Giottos does decent shit, Harrisons used to have them in.

Otherwise could look for an older 2nd hand manfrotto carbon or even better a gitzo - can be had for surprisingly little compared to brand new equivalents. For your canon a gitzo series-2 would be great and would stand you in good stead. Essentially these things will go on for a lifetime. My 2-series is strong enough to take my full bodyweight without flinching.

There's some decent old Velbon and Slik carbons worth a look too if one comes up second hand, despite them not being trendy names any more.

[Paul B]

The Feisols are way too much $. I see what Johnny is saying but I just can't justify over £200 on legs (traveller) + head + filters, there's not a chance.

[dave]

Whats your budget then for tripod, and filters?

To really keep it cheap this is what to do:

Buy a single 2-stop Hitech grad, or if you can run to it a 2 and a 3 or the full set of 1-2-3. If you go for P-sizes then its a shit load cheaper so you should be able to buy all three.
Attach to lens or front of your polariser with blutack. Avoids the vignetting issue and having to tart about with cokin holder rings (although fuck it I can give you my sawnoff holder and 77mm ring, I'm never going to use it).

Tripod, buy a manfrotto 190 2nd hand and a decent 2nd hand ballhead, making sure to get legs with the flip locks not the shit wingnut ones. All should be readily available on ebay or pop in any decent photo shop in america. Don't bother with the ones with the multi-position columns, only adds weight and loses stability. Won't be as light as a carbon but I never had problems flying with mine, and you can leave the centre column at home to save weight.

You can probably get all of the above for not much over a ton or even less.

[Paul B]

Whats your budget then for tripod, and filters?

I know its not helpful but as little as possible.

Buy a single 2-stop Hitech grad, or if you can run to it a 2 and a 3 or the full set of 1-2-3. If you go for P-sizes then its a shit load cheaper so you should be able to buy all three.

Am I right in assuming soft is the way forward here?

Attach to lens or front of your polariser with blutack. Avoids the vignetting issue and having to tart about with cokin holder rings (although fuck it I can give you my sawnoff holder and 77mm ring, I'm never going to use it).

You sure?

Won't be as light as a carbon but I never had problems flying with mine, and you can leave the centre column at home to save weight.

The main weight issues is the rack, haul bag + all the other shit rather than the tripod (which is maybe the best incentive to buy out there).

You can probably get all of the above for not much over a ton or even less.

 

[dave]

It's a tough call between hard and soft from what I remember of the Hitechs. Probably safer to go with soft, especially if you're thinking wide rather than long lens and you're only buying one. Soft are easier to "hide" the transition, but harder to place accurately (use DOF preview/lens stopdown), whereas the converse is true of hards. In Lees I only use hards as they are not all that hard.  You could always split the difference and get a mixture of soft and hard if buying a few.

Just checked and I've got Cokin rings in 52, 58, 67 & 77mm and a holder somewhere. You can certainly have em for your trip at least, I don't currently own any P sizes filters to use em with.

[Paul B]

Just checked and I've got Cokin rings in 52, 58, 67 & 77mm and a holder somewhere. You can certainly have em for your trip at least, I don't currently own any P sizes filters to use em with.

Amazing, thanks (my lenses are 58, 67 and 77). I can get you those extremely strong Durham Brewery Ales at the same time!

[Paul B]

What do you use most 2 stop/3 stop? The hitech filters are fairly good value individually from Bristol Cameras so I may go with them.

[dave]

Hard to say as I've never kept tabs on it, but I reckon 2 stops gets the most use.

Check how much hitechs are direct from the factory (Formatt filters website).

[Johnny Brown]

The Cokin 7 set is £140

Which gets you what? Sounds like Lee is out of range for you at the mo. What size polariser have you got, 77mm?

I've got a load of Cokin P stuff too which you can borrow.

I've never owned a 3 stop grad myself, I use the 2 70% of the time, the 1 20% and both together 10%. Using the combo means you can make it as hard or soft as you like. Cofe had hi-tech and they seemed better than Cokin. I don't know how hard they are but had are generally more useful.

[gingerninja]

just spotted this, paul you will have issues with the p filters on the 17-40mm. at anything wider than about 20mm you can see the filter and holder.
if you want to have a mess with some i have a nd, nd grad, warming and red filters you can borrow with the holder and some rings.

[SA Chris]

Paul, what do you have in mind using these filters for? Mostly Landscapes?

If so, from my experience of taking pics in the US you normally have clear blue skies, and very little cloud detail to worry about trying to retain (apart from the occasional fluffy little cloud, but that's only in Arizona) and you can get away with just a polariser a lot of the time. I mostly shot slide and with some accurate metering and the occasional bit of bracketing and just a polariser I usually came away with the shots I wanted.

May be worth keeping your money in your pocket for now (or cadging anything you can borrow) and buying a filter or two along the way if you feel the need after doing some reviewing of pics.

[Paul B]

Which gets you what? Sounds like Lee is out of range for you at the mo. What size polariser have you got, 77mm?

0.3, 0.6, 0.9, holder and wallet I think (so you just need the step up ring of choice).

I've got a load of Cokin P stuff too which you can borrow.

again, you sure?

I don't know how hard they are but had are generally more useful.

I take it you mean hard?

just spotted this, paul you will have issues with the p filters on the 17-40mm. at anything wider than about 20mm you can see the filter and holder.
if you want to have a mess with some i have a nd, nd grad, warming and red filters you can borrow with the holder and some rings.

I think Dave has trimmed his holder to remove this issue, is it only the outer holder you can see? Thanks for the offer but I've got around 2 weeks which are filling up rapidly, the chance of me borrowing stuff and returning it before running away would be slim!

Paul, what do you have in mind using these filters for? Mostly Landscapes?

Yup.

If so, from my experience of taking pics in the US you normally have clear blue skies, and very little cloud detail to worry about trying to retain (apart from the occasional fluffy little cloud, but that's only in Arizona) and you can get away with just a polariser a lot of the time. I mostly shot slide and with some accurate metering and the occasional bit of bracketing and just a polariser I usually came away with the shots I wanted.

Interesting. On which format? Here in the Peak I've ended up with some pretty bad polariser effects at 17mm which I'm told gets worse with altitude?

May be worth keeping your money in your pocket for now (or cadging anything you can borrow) and buying a filter or two along the way if you feel the need after doing some reviewing of pics.

With all the kind offers I think I'm going to 'cadge anything I can' 

[Durbs]

With regards to Cokins, the below is a Cokin 10-stop ND and the strong soft-grad.

No PP - the colour of the sky is the colour cast you get when stacking (Doesn't appear when just using one). I left it as-is, as I liked the colour combos, but shooting in RAW would be easy to fix.

http://500px.com/photo/23014515

[dave]

Thinking about it I reckon I've got an old Cokin 2 stop in a box somewhere, might be a bit scratched but would get you started, if only to confirm if P size will suit your lens.

I'd avoid polariser with super wides if there's clear skies, you really need clouds or trees to hide that unevenness behind.

[Paul B]

With regards to Cokins...

Ta. From what I've read the Hitechs were the same until recent re-design which eliminated IR build-up and the associated colour casts.

I'd avoid polariser with super wides if there's clear skies, you really need clouds or trees to hide that unevenness behind.

TBH I almost wish I hadn't gone ofr the 77mm and just had it for the fiddy.

[SA Chris]

If so, from my experience of taking pics in the US you normally have clear blue skies, and very little cloud detail to worry about trying to retain (apart from the occasional fluffy little cloud, but that's only in Arizona) and you can get away with just a polariser a lot of the time. I mostly shot slide and with some accurate metering and the occasional bit of bracketing and just a polariser I usually came away with the shots I wanted.

Interesting. On which format? Here in the Peak I've ended up with some pretty bad polariser effects at 17mm which I'm told gets worse with altitude?

Old Pentax MZ 5n and when that died ME Super (had to change polariser types though) using a standard 28-80 lens and occasionally 24mm prime.

What do you mean by "bad polariser effects"? My experience was that you didn't need to use the polarising effect as much and at altitude you can often do without.

[Paul B]

Where you get different amounts of polarisation throughout the image:


The 4th Cloud by travelswithmyt4, on Flickr

at altitude I've been shown examples with an almost black triangle in one part of the sky going through to light blue in others. I think you're pretty much OK for this above 24mm?

Dave, when you were referring to 190 series legs with the 'twist lock' were you meaning the wing-nut closure type?