what filter system should I choose?

[mervynyan]

I have few B+W UV for various sizes for lens protection. Now I got into 4x5 for landscape, I want to find a universal square format filter set. Mostly I want the full set from CPL to ND. The Cokin P or Lee sytem look alike. If I were to get any one of these, any suggestions?

Thanks,

[Brian Ellis]

You don't say how you plan to print (i.e. darkroom or digital). However, if you plan to scan your film and then edit in Photoshop then you don't need any filters except a polarizer. Photoshop contains photo filters that are better better than traditional in-camera filters because you can adjust their effects or you can use a filter on only a portion of the image or you can use different filters for different parts of the image (e.g. a red filter to darken skies, a green filter to lighten foliage).

[roteague]

I have few B+W UV for various sizes for lens protection. Now I got into 4x5 for landscape, I want to find a universal square format filter set. Mostly I want the full set from CPL to ND. The Cokin P or Lee sytem look alike. If I were to get any one of these, any suggestions?

Thanks,

No question, get the Lee. The quality difference is readily apparent. I started with the Cokin, but would never go back to it .... the Lee system is just that good.

[erie patsellis]

You don't say how you plan to print (i.e. darkroom or digital). However, if you plan to scan your film and then edit in Photoshop then you don't need any filters except a polarizer. Photoshop contains photo filters that are better better than traditional in-camera filters because you can adjust their effects or you can use a filter on only a portion of the image or you can use different filters for different parts of the image (e.g. a red filter to darken skies, a green filter to lighten foliage).

Brian,
That would work great if (and I don't know if or not) the original poster is shooting color film, given the fact that many LF photographers shoot b&w, in which case the filters cited are of zero use. The only way to affect tonality in that case is to use filters when shooting.


erie

[Ben Chase]

I have few B+W UV for various sizes for lens protection. Now I got into 4x5 for landscape, I want to find a universal square format filter set. Mostly I want the full set from CPL to ND. The Cokin P or Lee sytem look alike. If I were to get any one of these, any suggestions?

Thanks,

4x6 Grads and the Lee system. The Lee holder is significantly better constructed than the Cokin system. 4x6 grads give you enough filter to make hand-holding easily. I would take ND grads over trying to do it in Photoshop, just based on my own preferences. I'd prefer to only have to mess with the curves in PS, and would prefer to get all of the other stuff correct before I even get to the scanning process.

Now only if I could get a free Phase One P45+.......

[Eric James]

I'm using the Cokin P system with Singh Ray filters - this set up is smaller and lighter than the Lee system. In the past I have had some problems with vignetting, but I believe that I have solved it by changing my step-up ring "strategy". If it weren't for the greater weight and size I wouldn't hesitate to change to the Lee system, despite the greater cost and my current level of Cokin P investment.

I carry two Cokin P holders in the field - one with the outer slot cut off (a hack saw does the trick) and the other unaltered. I typically use a single filter but it's nice to have the option to use two. Over the years I have had two cut-down single-slot Cokin P holders break - cutting off the outer slot weakens the inner slot, so it's good to have the a second one in the pack.

From all I've read here, if you can justify the cost, weight and size of the Lee system, you should go with it. Ben (above) has had his work featured on the Singh Ray site, and he's apparently jumped ship.

[Ben Chase]

From all I've read here, if you can justify the cost, weight and size of the Lee system, you should go with it. Ben (above) has had his work featured on the Singh Ray site, and he's apparently jumped ship.

I've jumped ship from the P-mount system, but not from Singh-ray's filters. I still have a variety of them, as I do Lee filters. Both are best-of-class.

Either way and you can't go wrong.

[roteague]

From all I've read here, if you can justify the cost, weight and size of the Lee system, you should go with it.

The difference in weight between the two systems can be measured in ounces.

[BennehBoy]

I made the decision to purchase a Lee system when I first wanted to get some filters for my 35mm setup. Since then I've moved into medium format (6x6 & 6x7) and now large format, the decision I made early on has meant a smaller overall investment, coupled with the best quality filters on the market.

Subsequent lens purchases have only required either a new adapter ring, or very inexpensive step up/down filter rings.

I can wholeheartedly recommended Lee.

[CG]

Lee hoods are wonderful. I bought the Lee system just to have the hood.

C

[Eric James]

Thanks for started the other thread Ben - I wasn't aware that Singh Ray was making 4x6 filters.



The difference in weight between the two systems can be measured in ounces.

Or grams - your choice. And size can be measured in mm squared Robert;) Have you seen the size of that Lee wide angle hood for polarizer - plenty of room in your baby carriage for that eh?

[Brian Ellis]

Brian,
That would work great if (and I don't know if or not) the original poster is shooting color film, given the fact that many LF photographers shoot b&w, in which case the filters cited are of zero use. The only way to affect tonality in that case is to use filters when shooting.


erie

Yes, I forgot that the specific red, green, yellow, etc. filters found in "Image > Adjust > Photo Filters" can't be used with b&w (at least not in the same way they're used with b&w in-camera). However, there are so many other ways to alter monochromatic tones in Photoshop that I think the basic idea is correct.

[anchored]

Go Lee filter system... there's no better. As noted by others, they're much better than Cokin holders. Not only built better, but they also provide other benefits, such as:

a) Filter slides can be subtracted by simply removing by screwdriver instead of by hacksaw.

b) Filter slides can be added by simply adding more (available as accessories).

c) Filter slides can be adjusted to accommodate thinner filters (such as HiTech) by simply adjusting tension of the slide screws.

As a further note: I keep the adapter rings permanently mounted on all of my lenses... less fuss and bother with changing or installing adapters. Yes... an expensive alternative but the time savings are worth it... at least to me. Also... you can buy snap-on "lens caps" that fits onto the adapter rings... they're dirt-cheap ($8.95 for 3 as I recall at B&H) and they don't always pop off when slightly touched (as do many others).

I use the Lee 105mm polarizer attached to the front of one of my holders... has a wonderfully wide range of polarity and provides a pleasing deep blue color. I also use ND gradiants by Lee and Singh-Ray and HiTech. I prefer doing this in-camera instead of afterwards in PhotoShop... to my eye it appears more natural.

[roteague]

Have you seen the size of that Lee wide angle hood for polarizer - plenty of room in your baby carriage for that eh?

No, unfortunately, I haven't. I bet it is pretty big. I think I can begin to imagine what it would look like; I have two normal Lee hoods (one slot, and slide on).