04-04-2016, 06:53 PM
Long ago a Berlin photographer made a blog post about those expensive vs. cheap ND-filters: http://text.flowtographyberlin.de/neutra...ood-as-bw/
Here's a picture I made with a 150x150mm (6x6") Firecrest ND 3.0 (10 Stops) (150£... stupid, I know)
![[Image: i-jjmbTwT-L.jpg]](https://sojujo.smugmug.com/photos/i-jjmbTwT/0/L/i-jjmbTwT-L.jpg)
after a while I could get this result in Aperture
![[Image: i-vPr2K8q-L.jpg]](https://sojujo.smugmug.com/photos/i-vPr2K8q/0/L/i-vPr2K8q-L.jpg)
As you can see, there are some dust particles which will also become visible, because the filter needs some distance to the front element. Also, the corners get weaker, because a flat filter in front of a bulbous lens can cause distortion. and vignetting and reflexes, even to the holder
![[Image: i-3TzDD7C-L.jpg]](https://sojujo.smugmug.com/photos/i-3TzDD7C/0/L/i-3TzDD7C-L.jpg)
Here's a picture I made with a 150x150mm (6x6") Firecrest ND 3.0 (10 Stops) (150£... stupid, I know)
after a while I could get this result in Aperture
As you can see, there are some dust particles which will also become visible, because the filter needs some distance to the front element. Also, the corners get weaker, because a flat filter in front of a bulbous lens can cause distortion. and vignetting and reflexes, even to the holder