Jump to content
Inazuma

Tiffen Ultra / Low Contrast filters

Recommended Posts

that low contrast look can also be achived with the right lenses that have that look .

 

one that is very very good for this is the Tokina RMC 28-85mm f4

 

Andy, sometimes I got a feeling there isn't a lens you haven't tried... :)

 

 

Inazuma: Beautiful video. The shots with shorter depth of field around 1.26 to 1.35 shows a lovely out of focus character from whatever lens he used.

 

I'm also stuck with H.264, no RAW or LOG. I recommend experimenting with filters to create new looks and get the most out of a H.264 camera.

 

I wonder if you couldn't get similar look to that video with the combination of either a vintage lens or Dog Schidt Optiks lens + ND filter and perhaps a polarizer - and maybe nylon stocking like previously suggested.

 

I've used Cokin square ND filters in harsh sunlight, and I have noticed that they also seem to squeeze down the dynamic range a little bit so that the camera manages to get better results in H.264. Besides the original Cokin filters that seem to have better quality - I've also bought these cheap chinese copies of the ND filters that fit for the Cokin P filter system. Although they are fairly neutral, they aren't entirely. But unlike variable ND filters you don't loose sharpness or get any vignetting since they are fairly large filters.

 

This would be a clone of the kind of the original Cokin P filter system I have, with a set of ND filters for a low sum:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Complete-ND-2-4-8-16-Filter-Kit-for-Cokin-P-Square-Holder-Adapter-Hood-LF292-/201040029698?pt=ES_C%C3%A1maras_de_v%C3%ADdeo&hash=item2eceeb6802

 

Add a vintage lens and a polarizer (when it suits) with those and you won't have such a digital look. 

 

I haven't really minded that the filters aren't neutral and that the color changes a bit - I can either adjust the white balance a bit for that while shooting or adjust it in post if I want to and still achieve a result I'm happy with. My cheap ND's tend to turn colors a bit towards the yellow/orange/brown spectrum which I often tend to like. Stacking 2 ND filters in the filter system adds more color tint.

 

Personally I'm also inclined to enjoy a real diffusion filter better than to deal with the hassle of stocking at the front/rear of a lens (if secured with tape, I bet it can easily become unevenly attached, tape can loosen up etc - not like a filter with thread that you just screw in). I've been considering getting some Tiffen diffusion filters, but haven't bitten the bullet yet. Guess I should get some stockings and at least experiment a bit to see if I want a real Tiffen filter or not :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

So I bit the bullet over the week and bought the filter. From what I had read the filters work by spreading the light around the image, which is different to simply using a low contrast lens I think. And besides that, I don't want to add another lens to my collection when I already have three superb ones.

 

I started with Ultra Contrast 3. It had good effect but I thought I'd go further so this morning I received the #5.

 

The filters have an immediate effect of making the image look way more filmic. The reason for this is that really do spread the light around the image - but it's not so simple. They take in more ambient light and thus ambient colour. The result is that you get a much more balanced picture in terms of colour and tonality. These filters really are something magical.

 

I have been shooting a fair bit with them over the past few days and will be putting together a video, but for now here's a few images:

 

No filter, Standard iDynamic:

 

dfRpCa6.jpg

 

With FilmConvert:

 

fWFw1Hk.jpg

 

Tiffen Ultra Contrast #5 (no iDynamic):

 

uTcxWnD.jpg

 

With FilmConvert and some additional saturation.

 

tIGrJ8t.jpg

 

Each filter costs just over £100 for the 77mm sizes. I do recommend getting the strongest one (the #5). After further consideration I think the #3 is a better choice because the #5 washes out darker midtones too readily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I bit the bullet over the week and bought the filter. From what I had read the filters work by spreading the light around the image, which is different to simply using a low contrast lens I think. And besides that, I don't want to add another lens to my collection when I already have three superb ones.

 

I started with Ultra Contrast 3. It had good effect but I thought I'd go further so this morning I received the #5.

 

The filters have an immediate effect of making the image look way more filmic. The reason for this is that really do spread the light around the image - but it's not so simple. They take in more ambient light and thus ambient colour. The result is that you get a much more balanced picture in terms of colour and tonality. These filters really are something magical.

 

I have been shooting a fair bit with them over the past few days and will be putting together a video, but for now here's a few images:

 

No filter, Standard iDynamic:

 

With FilmConvert:

 

Tiffen Ultra Contrast #5 (no iDynamic):

 

With FilmConvert and some additional saturation.

 

Each filter costs just over £100 for the 77mm sizes. I do recommend getting the strongest one (the #5). After further consideration I think the #3 is a better choice because the #5 washes out darker midtones too readily.

Cool test. I really like the look you got out of it in the end. Thanks for sharing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can get the same look just by using a Tokina RMC 28-85MM F4 - the glass gives you this look as is with no filter

, its a very very low contrast and low saturation lens - also very very good on a speedbooster too.....and very cheap on ebay .......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a bit harder (and pricier) to find one that would fit a focal reducer mounttype (which you would need to have in your possession) for prices less than said filter.

And the filter itself, if you'd just get a large diameter one, you could just throw it on any lens at your disposal already. So it's rather optional and flexible, which I think is a pretty big plus.

 

But since I already have a dumb Minolta adapter for my oldschool 50mm f/1.7 and 28mm f/2.8, I'll just give the suggested RMC as MD-version a go. And it was indeed actually decently priced (and considerably less than the filter costs) and the one in question supposedly is not optically impaired (came across a few with issues), so yeah, color me intrigued; let's find out. You seem to have a vast knowledge of all sort of lenses and always willing to help and make suggestions. Thanks for that; that kind of input is really helpful and appreciated and I do like my vintage/legacy lenses, they have such character, so I'm always pleased to get my hands on something that has a bit of soul and will be cared for once more. It's kind of going to an animal shelter and adopting a cute furry little fellow. :lol: Can be so rewarding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tokina RMC zooms have alot of character and soul

 

they do a 28-70mm f4 and a 25-50 f4 to go with the said 28-85mm f4 all have this low contrast look to them

 

I use all 3 as a set together along with a sigma 24mm superwide II prime that also has this look

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday I received mine and i did a quick & dirty comparison:



I am quite pleased but I need to do some outdoor shots this weekend. The filter looks a bit like leica glow without loosinh sharpness however.

I find a bit more difficult to focus without an EVF on my GM1 - maybe i need to upgrade to GM5 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice test :) I don't think you needed to sharpen it though. It makes the compression artefacts stand out too much.

 

 

This is my entry for the HitRecord competition by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. The objective is to take cinematic, handheld footage of your city. And it needs to include some walking shots as well as a shot with the camera on myself.

 

The afternoon and early evening shots were done on Saturday when I received the Ultra Contrast 5 filter. As I mentioned I think it's a bit too strong and so used the #3 for the rest of the footage which I took over the next few days.

 

Really like the image I get with the filter on. Just a shame about my terriby shaky hands :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice test :) I don't think you needed to sharpen it though. It makes the compression artefacts stand out too much.

 

 

This is my entry for the HitRecord competition by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. The objective is to take cinematic, handheld footage of your city. And it needs to include some walking shots as well as a shot with the camera on myself.

 

The afternoon and early evening shots were done on Saturday when I received the Ultra Contrast 5 filter. As I mentioned I think it's a bit too strong and so used the #3 for the rest of the footage which I took over the next few days.

 

Really like the image I get with the filter on. Just a shame about my terriby shaky hands :P

I had no idea you where a Mancunian too ! - we should start the Manchester GX7 shooters club!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy don't you remember the message I sent you months ago when I was still a bit of a newbie around here? :) I had noticed you were based in Manchester and told you I was too. I'm not actually Mancunian though. I just work here. 

 

Would be cool to shoot with you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all I'd like to say hi to everyone on the forum :-)

 

I guess I would've never have the guts to post my video (No More False Alarms) here, so big thanks for Inazuma for letting me know about the thread he started. That really made my day, thanks! :-)

 

I just wanted to chime in about the Tiffen Ultra Cons. I have used the #3 with 5Dmk2 (at that time I've found #5 to be an overkill as well), but when I switched to GX7 everything changed.

 

Most of the test posted here were done in pretty low contrast conditions already. In that case Ultra Con #5 seems like an overkill. An it will be. Unless you shoot in the summer, in the middle of the day. 30% of my footage from Crete was shot in broad daylight. Of course you have to be careful when shooting backlight. I had some vignetting from the lens hood - which was unavoidable, but my love of "fake anamorphic" (i.e. cropping the image) took care of that.

 

Stronger Ultra Con really helps with front-lighted subjects, taking harshness off things. Of course I got some pretty washed out shots sometimes, but was surprised how much of the image I could recover with simple levels/curves adjustment in post.

 

So I'd say - get both. #3 for our European gloomy days, #5 for this happy one week of vacation :-]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy don't you remember the message I sent you months ago when I was still a bit of a newbie around here? :) I had noticed you were based in Manchester and told you I was too. I'm not actually Mancunian though. I just work here. 

 

Would be cool to shoot with you!

cool Ok MP me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another quick comparison I did:

 

 

This time outdoor (cloudy) including the ultra contrast 3 - and no sharpening in post ;)

 

I have to admit that i definitely will return the 5, since the 3 is sufficient. What really bothers me is that this filter does not really work together with filmconvert's film grain (which is 50% in this example).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shot a set up last week with the Tokina RMC 28-85MM f4 low contrast lens :

 

we wanted to go for that 1940's Pinup Girl on low contrast film stock look for this set up.

 

frame grab of

Tokina RMC 28-85MM f4 on Lens Turbo speedbooster

Panasonic GX7

no processing image is straight out the camera

 

low contrast lens

1/50 sec 400 iso f4 wide open

 

vlcsnap-2014-11-09-11h17m03s196'' target='_blank'>vlcsnap-2014-11-09-11h17m03s196> vlcsnap-2014-11-09-11h17m03s196

 

vlcsnap-2014-11-09-11h17m47s130'' target='_blank'>vlcsnap-2014-11-09-11h17m47s130> vlcsnap-2014-11-09-11h17m47s130

 

 

it gives you a similar look to the Tiffen filter discussed here but its all done in the lens and as its a 28-85mm zoom its very useful

as you can do the whole set up on just one lens , 28mm for the wides 40mm for the coverage and 85mm for the close ups

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't use it everyday just for setups that need that low contrast look - it also works well with a strong back light to wash it out even more and cause internal bounce inside the lens.

 

BTW - dont forget to dial out all the contrast and saturation in your camera colour profile too!

 

as its no good using this lens on a vivid setting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By Grégory LEROY
      Hello,
      I've noticed a change in color temperature when I tweak the contrast setting on my Nikon D5500.
      I set the WB manually, same WB setting for both camera and here is the result:
      Standard Nikon color profile, Contrast 0, sharpness 0:

       
      Nikon standard profile Contrast  -4, sharpness -4, contrast and sharpness edited in premiere afterward, but I didn't tweak the color temperature at all:
       
      H
      How do you explain that the 2nd picture is more yellowish? Does tweaking the contrast level in camera impact the WB?
      I prefer the 1st picture look (Nikon standard profile), as a result I don't touch my image setting anymore.
    • By mechanicalEYE
      Tiffen Ultra Contrast 3 Filter 67mm ( for sale )  EXCELLENT condition. No Issues...   30.00 shipped OBO with in USA.
    • Guest a6cba463b7b6f059de127c1b121c0c78
      By Guest a6cba463b7b6f059de127c1b121c0c78
      I'm not talking about 4K downscaled - just native 1080. Obviously the GH4 has higher bitrates and ALL-I, but I could swear the stuff I'm seeing from the GX7 has less moire and/or aliasing than GH4HD, and is possibly a tad sharper too? 
       
      I can't find any direct comparisons online. Does anyone have any experience or an opinion on this?
    • By LunyAlex
      Good Day!

      I'm new to the site and new to video work, but I've been lurking around the forums and Review Articles for a while now, trying to figure out what camera I should pick.
       
      While totally new to serious videography, I've been doing photography and very light video on the side for about 6 years, so I wouldn't say I'm blind to the more enthusiast thresholds of acceptable quality.
       
      With that in mind, I've narrowed it down to two models. Well... one. Two. Maybe just one. Possibly two. 

      GX7.
      Or GH3. 
       
      Currently I'm heavily leaning towards the GX7 as:
       
      - I assume focus peaking for someone that isn't trained in the art of manual focusing would be nothing short of magical(?).
      - I will not be needing high quality external audio (for the foreseeable future) (I'll probably mostly be doing artsy montages with music on top,heh...).
      But I've seen the GH3 recommended over the GX7 for video quite a few times because of:

      - Bitrate
      - Codec
       
      I have read Mr. Reid's (predominantly positive) thoughts on the GX7 and that strongly weighed into me currently leaning towards it. 
       
      My question is:
       
      Has anyone who has tried both the GX7 and a more codec-competent (higher bitrate) solution ever been strongly frustrated with the former at any point?
       
      Like going "THAT WAS THE PERFECT SHOT! GOD HIMSELF PARTED THE SKIES AND UNLEASHED THE MOST HEAVENLY RAYS OF LIGHT THAT DUCK HAS EVER SEEN. YOU HAD - ONE JOB! " when you came home to realize that the water ripples in your perfect shot created the occasional blocky codec artifact? 
       
      I guess my question can mostly be boiled down to "Bitrate Vs. Focus Peaking". I hope it isn't overly redundant. 
       
      Any advice and personal input would be really really appreciated. Like...
       
      ...this much > [                                                                                                                                                                         ]
    • By Nini
      Hiya Guys!
       
      I'm new to this forum and will try to be as clear as possible. :)
       
      I'm about to buy new gear for videography pretty soon and have already chosen to go for the GH4,
      that i will use with these lenses : Voigtlander Nokton MF 35mm f/1.4 (77mm with crop factor), Nikkor 35mm DX (56mm with speedbooster), Nikkor 50mm FX (80mm with sb) and a Nikkor 18-55mm DX (28,8-88mm with sb).    I applied a 2,2 crop factor for Voigtlander lenses and 1,6 for the Nikon ones (DX and FX). Is this correct? I keep seeing different crop factors all over the internet.    The main use will be documentary and travel videography, so I'm trying to get good and sharp gear easy to travel with as I'll be shooting alone or with only one person.  I've read several threads on the eoshd forum, reviews... and still have a few questions concerning ND filters.    It seems like I should get a variable ND filter with a 77 or 82mm diameter. The max budget for the filters (one VND or filter system) would be 300/400 US dollars tops.    - would you recommend a VND filter rather than a filter-system + ND filters for my use? - my Nokton diameter is 43mm, do you know if a step up ring 43-82 mm or 43-77mm exists? I couldn't find one over the internet.  - if you faced this problem, did you find a solution?  - would I get vignetting on corners with wide lenses even with the crop factor?  - Reviews seem to highlight the Heliopan and Tiffen VND, are there massive pros for one rather than the other?    I'm sorry for this long post! One question always seems to lead to another one...  Thank you very much to those who will read and answer me :)  And a huge thank you to all other posts and people in the forum for the previous topics that helped me.  Woooo!
×
×
  • Create New...