Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
A $40 variable ND filter that surprisingly doesn't suck
  • SangyeSangye

    I broke my L.C.W Fader Variable ND II a while back, and finally got around to replacing it. I decided to give the Bower variable ND a try, at $40. Bower makes decent lenses, so I thought I might luck out.

    And luck out, I did. It's definitely better than the L.C.W, with much less bokeh striation / "texture", no noticeable color shift up to the strongest setting, and the characteristic 'X' pattern only shows up at the very strongest settings (7/8+), as opposed to on the L.C.W where it dominates the image at every strength above 2/3 or so. I haven't tried many higher end variable ND filters, but I'd like to see how this one stacks up against them. So far I'm very impressed.

    The only issue I have noticed is that the first 1/5 of the adjustment throw seems to go from a strong polarizing effect to a more transparent effect, without any ND loss or gain. After that the polarizing effect stays minimal, and the neutral density increases as expected. On the plus side, this quirk might mean that the filter could double as both a variable ND filter, and as a linear polarizer.

    It just arrived and these are my preliminary impressions -- I'll post more in-depth thoughts with image samples soon.

  • 14 Replies sorted by
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    What is the exact filter you are talking about? It is so much of them.

  • SangyeSangye

    "Bower 77mm Variable Neutral Density Fader NDX Filter ND2 to ND1000 FN77"

  • brianlbrianl

    What camera are you using it on?

  • jazzroyjazzroy

    from the pictures it looks exactly like vivitar, fotga, and other chinese brands ND filter, starting from 16$ to 35$ and producing low quality results. did you do any comparative test? LCW should be much sharper, especially at high values.

  • SangyeSangye

    Attached are 300% crops from my GH4 in 4K DCI mode, using the Bower variable ND at different strengths. Lens is the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 (with MFT speedbooster), at 24mm, f/3.5. I changed shutter speed to maintain exposure. White balance was set at 5600K. ISO is at 200, except for the last one.

    The first still is without the filter, SS at something like 1/2500 sec.

    The second still is with the filter at the weakest setting. SS is something like 1/2000 sec. Note that it has a pronounced depolarizing effect, which allows the greens in the tree to show more saturation.

    The third still is with the filter at around 1/4 strength. SS has not changed.

    The fourth still is with the filter at around 1/2 strength. SS is at 1/500 sec.

    The fifth still is with the filter at around 3/4 strength. SS is at 1/50 sec.

    The final still is with the filter at nearly full strength. SS is at 1/50 sec, and ISO was raised to 1600. Unsurprisingly, this one looks bad, with reduced dynamic range due to the ISO boost. There is also a noticeable decrease in sharpness.

    In my analysis, the sharpness holds quite well across the different strengths up until the strongest. Some decrease in sharpness in the last two is attributable to the shutter speed, as there was a slight breeze coming through the tree branches. The color shift is minor; any changes in color across these images is more directly attributable to a variable polarizing effect.

    I do not think that the L.C.W performs as well as this filter, but I don't have one with me to compare it to. YMMV.

    edit -- note, the last two stills are reversed. Unfortunately I'm not able to fix that by editing; the images are all numbered, however.

    Bower 0 (300).jpg
    4096 x 2160 - 2M
    Bower 1 (300).jpg
    4096 x 2160 - 2M
    Bower 2 (300).jpg
    4096 x 2160 - 2M
    Bower 3 (300).jpg
    4096 x 2160 - 2M
    Bower 5 (300).jpg
    4096 x 2160 - 2M
    Bower 4 (300).jpg
    4096 x 2160 - 2M
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @Sangye

    Use images hosting for large photos, please.

  • jazzroyjazzroy

    judging from the photo it's not so bad. i have a similar one and with tele lenses it gives a horrible soft effect

  • SangyeSangye

    Yeah, I just shot some more today and the results were consistent with my initial impressions: this definitely performs better than you'd expect for a $40 VND. The bokeh texture / "striation" is my biggest complaint, but it's still not as coarse as the L.C.W Fader mk. II that I used to own.

    The 'X' pattern also doesn't show up until a strength that I find myself unlikely ever to want to use anyway (e.g. T1.3, 1/50s, bright sunlight, ISO 1600).

    Color shift is negligible. Sometimes green things seem to get an ever so slightly brownish cast, but it's so, so subtle.

    Softening is also quite mild. In my testing it's not an issue, and if anything seems to be a subjective change rather than an objective softening. I have not used it on a lens longer than 85mm, though, so maybe it's worse on teles.

    My verdict is that, for $40, this is should be an obvious choice for a budget VND. If I had more money of course I'd buy a Schneider, Singh-Ray, or Heliopan, but this performs like what I'd expect from a VND in the $150-$250 range.

  • SangyeSangye

    Here is a long exposure still, using the Bower VND at the strongest setting before the 'X' pattern starts to appear (7/8 strength, roughly).

    17MP, downscaled to 1080p.

    P1010047.JPG.Still001.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 1M
  • SangyeSangye

    Here are two frame grabs from 4K video on my GH4, downscaled to 1080p. The Bower VND was set to roughly 2/3 strength. Both of these, as well as the still in my last post, were taken on my Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 with the Nikon-MFT Speedbooster.

    P1010068.MOV.Still001.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 377K
    P1010070.MOV.Still001.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 661K
  • SangyeSangye

    And here is the worst example of bokeh striation that I've found in what I've shot with this filter so far. This was shot on my Rokinon 85mm T/1.5 Cine, with Speedbooster. My copy of this lens is not particularly sharp to begin with, as you may notice.

    P1010059.MOV.Still001.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 413K
  • CFreakCFreak

    Thanks @Sangye for this post. I need to get a 77mm Fader ND. Light Craft Workshop seems to have left the business, lol. I liked their 62mm Fader on the Pana 14-140. I didn't use it much but didn't see a quality loss.

    I am looking for something in 77mm for another lens.

    The "Bower 77mm Variable Neutral Density Fader NDX Filter ND2 to ND1000 FN77" doesn't seem to be available anywhere but on ebay, which is a bad sign. Was the filter material glass or resin?

    Does anyone have another suggestion?

  • touviere7touviere7

    looking as well for a 77mm, and i was thinking of trying the slr magic variable nd marl II . relatively expensive but seems very good.

  • CinegainCinegain

    Yeah, I initially went with the Fotga after reading about it on: http://cheesycam.com/fotga-variable-nd-fader-filter-sample/ . I mean, decent for the price, but nothing to write home about.

    Not a fan of the polarizing filter side effects of variable NDs, I opted to go with fixed value NDs when Breakthrough Photography did their first thing on Kickstarter. 77mm. I had faith in them. And you can see a nice recent FStoppers video that that's been the way to go luckily!

    I also just briefly want to mention a high quality Chinese manufacturer, although, only some of their filters are good standards with Schott imported glass (watch for 'HD', 'PRO', 'Schott'), not all. ZOMEI. They can be found here: http://www.aliexpress.com/store/1582034 | http://www.aliexpress.com/store/506058 , http://zomei.hk , which are similarly specced / designed compared to the Breakthrough photography ones. E.g. : http://www.aliexpress.com/item/ZOMEI-77mm-Slim-PROII-Neutral-Density-Multi-Coated-0-9-ND8-Filter-Shott-glass/32255833464.html .

Add a Comment