SixSeven
Member
I've been wondering about this for a while ever since getting my 7II (my first rangefinder). I am a big fan of Lee's graduated neutral density filters, and use them probably close to 100% of the time when I shoot landscapes with my DSLR. Using them with a DSLR (a 5d II in this case) is the ideal setup, because you can sit back with live view and precisely place the grad line exactly how the horizon dictates.
As we all know, this is not the case with a rangefinder. There's obviously no TTL viewing so you don't know where the grad line even is. I've only done a small amount of shooting with the 7II compared to my 5D, and so far I've been lucky as far as getting the placement correct. Unfortunately, it's really just guess work. I do not like guess work. My basic technique is to put the filter I select into the holder off-camera, compose the shot, then throw the filter holder on, and look at the camera head on from the front and attempt to align the filter with the correct placement on the front element of the lens. Now imagine doing this in dim, fading light where every second counts. Nervousness and anxiety begin to build as you realize there's really no F'ing way you're sure about placement, especially with a hard grad, using slide film. With those conditions, the tiniest mistake means it's all a crapshoot.
But I'm not about to give up on my grads, nor am I about to get rid of the 7II. The problem is I love both, and want to use both together.
Enter the Lee RF75 system, which is not only smaller in size than the regular holder so it doesn't obstruct the viewfinder (quite as much), it has handy laser-etched guide lines on either side of the filter for common placement. IE, 1/8th of the way down, 1/4, 1/3, etc. Now technically, no matter the size of the front element, using these guide lines should make placement, especially of hard edged grads, much easier to approximate. Still not as good as live view, but I'd imagine much better than what I am used to doing. Look through the viewfinder, horizon is at the top third of the frame. Align the grad with the marking that corresponds to the top third of the lens, and bam.
Well, maybe. Here's the problem. The grad line isn't really dictated by the size of the front element. It's the aperture size, correct? When it comes down to it, light isn't just entering the front element, it's eventually passing through the tiny (when shooting landscapes anyway) aperture opening. So if you're using a lens with say a 2 or 3" front element, you're still trying to align the grad based on something MUCH smaller than that. At f22 on 6x7, much less than half an inch...which you're trying to look at through a piece of curved glass, again in fading light.
Another but. I attempted to verify this by using my 5d II and checking the grad line by changing apertures and using the DoF preview. I didn't see a difference at any aperture, from f22 to f1.4. Am I crazy? What's the right answer here? Is the grad line altered by the aperture or not?
Edit: Ok, I just tested this out with a plain white index card. Between f3.5, the maximum aperture of my 24mm lens, and f22, there is a definitive, measurable difference in positioning. Dammit. Then I began to think, "well if the difference is repeatable, I can compensate for it." Then I realized this would be different from lens to lens.
Suddenly that RZ67II looks really good.
As we all know, this is not the case with a rangefinder. There's obviously no TTL viewing so you don't know where the grad line even is. I've only done a small amount of shooting with the 7II compared to my 5D, and so far I've been lucky as far as getting the placement correct. Unfortunately, it's really just guess work. I do not like guess work. My basic technique is to put the filter I select into the holder off-camera, compose the shot, then throw the filter holder on, and look at the camera head on from the front and attempt to align the filter with the correct placement on the front element of the lens. Now imagine doing this in dim, fading light where every second counts. Nervousness and anxiety begin to build as you realize there's really no F'ing way you're sure about placement, especially with a hard grad, using slide film. With those conditions, the tiniest mistake means it's all a crapshoot.
But I'm not about to give up on my grads, nor am I about to get rid of the 7II. The problem is I love both, and want to use both together.
Enter the Lee RF75 system, which is not only smaller in size than the regular holder so it doesn't obstruct the viewfinder (quite as much), it has handy laser-etched guide lines on either side of the filter for common placement. IE, 1/8th of the way down, 1/4, 1/3, etc. Now technically, no matter the size of the front element, using these guide lines should make placement, especially of hard edged grads, much easier to approximate. Still not as good as live view, but I'd imagine much better than what I am used to doing. Look through the viewfinder, horizon is at the top third of the frame. Align the grad with the marking that corresponds to the top third of the lens, and bam.
Well, maybe. Here's the problem. The grad line isn't really dictated by the size of the front element. It's the aperture size, correct? When it comes down to it, light isn't just entering the front element, it's eventually passing through the tiny (when shooting landscapes anyway) aperture opening. So if you're using a lens with say a 2 or 3" front element, you're still trying to align the grad based on something MUCH smaller than that. At f22 on 6x7, much less than half an inch...which you're trying to look at through a piece of curved glass, again in fading light.
Another but. I attempted to verify this by using my 5d II and checking the grad line by changing apertures and using the DoF preview. I didn't see a difference at any aperture, from f22 to f1.4. Am I crazy? What's the right answer here? Is the grad line altered by the aperture or not?
Edit: Ok, I just tested this out with a plain white index card. Between f3.5, the maximum aperture of my 24mm lens, and f22, there is a definitive, measurable difference in positioning. Dammit. Then I began to think, "well if the difference is repeatable, I can compensate for it." Then I realized this would be different from lens to lens.
Suddenly that RZ67II looks really good.
Last edited:
Steve B
Established
I don't think it does.
I don't think it does.
Hi SixSeven, I think you're over-analyzing this. All the light that passes through the aperture also passes through the entirety of the front lens element as well, and can be affected at that point by a grad filter. I've never found any difference in grad placement with different apertures. I use grads a lot, usually on an slr, but I've used them a fair amount on RFs as well. And you're right, it is more difficult but it is feasible. I always use a soft stop grad though as they're a lot easier to place and I just take a lot more exposures as I know I'm not going to hit it right every time. I got inspired to try it in spite of the difficulties after seeing James Martins book North Cascades Crest where in most of the images were made with a Mamiya 7 with hand held grads.
Use the 7II, and use the grads, and be that much more pleased with the images you get in spite of the additional challenges. When you get it right its that much more rewarding.
I don't think it does.
Hi SixSeven, I think you're over-analyzing this. All the light that passes through the aperture also passes through the entirety of the front lens element as well, and can be affected at that point by a grad filter. I've never found any difference in grad placement with different apertures. I use grads a lot, usually on an slr, but I've used them a fair amount on RFs as well. And you're right, it is more difficult but it is feasible. I always use a soft stop grad though as they're a lot easier to place and I just take a lot more exposures as I know I'm not going to hit it right every time. I got inspired to try it in spite of the difficulties after seeing James Martins book North Cascades Crest where in most of the images were made with a Mamiya 7 with hand held grads.
Use the 7II, and use the grads, and be that much more pleased with the images you get in spite of the additional challenges. When you get it right its that much more rewarding.
john_s
Well-known
I've never used a grad filter, but I think it would be a good way for me to solve the usual problems of overexposed high sky areas.
This is a really good question. My guess is that the aperture will have an effect on the location of the gradient on the negative. At least with the Mamiya 7 you probably don't have too many lenses to experiment with. If most of your landscapes ar around f8, maybe it's easier to just standardize on that aperture?
This is a really good question. My guess is that the aperture will have an effect on the location of the gradient on the negative. At least with the Mamiya 7 you probably don't have too many lenses to experiment with. If most of your landscapes ar around f8, maybe it's easier to just standardize on that aperture?
SixSeven
Member
I did some more testing with an index card. There is indeed an appreciable difference when changing aperture, but only with extreme changes. For example, taking an exposure with the grad line 1/3rd down the LCD (using my 5dII's live view) at f1.4, then taking one at f22, the grad line appears to move about 1/4inch down the screen. This seems to be consistent from lens to lens, with the grad line moving downward slightly with each decrease in aperture size. I'm surprised there haven't been at least a few more replies to this thread. Anyone else have any experience with this?
Sparrow
Veteran
It isn't something that is easy to use on a RF, few users will have the experience
skibeerr
Well-known
Grads and rangefinders a marriage made in hell. It's all guestimation, I would recommend a very soft grad or gracketing (wow I invented a new word 
)
)craygc
Well-known
I use grads with a Mamiya 7II sometimes and as mentioned above its not the easiest task. What I use is a Lee filter system (and separate metering as it blocks the meter) and I have a piece of matt board cut to fit in the Lee holder with a 6:7 ratio square cut that is as big as the circle in the holder. I use this card in one of the filter slots and the ND grad in another then use that to look through (off camera) and gauge (roughly) where I want the transition relative to the framing.
Because of the square border I have a much better idea of where in the viewfinder that transition line sits and can compare the two until they both look the same. Now I remove the matt board carefully and lock the filter mount back onto the lens - seems to work ok.
Because of the square border I have a much better idea of where in the viewfinder that transition line sits and can compare the two until they both look the same. Now I remove the matt board carefully and lock the filter mount back onto the lens - seems to work ok.
lacavol
Established
Very interesting thread. I have never used a grad with a RF but I have many times with a SLR. I could then see the difference. I don't have a setup presently to do tests, so I can't really help you. I do find it interesting that there is a shift with aperture and also wonder if there are focus shifts. This is because I have a cheap hood that vignettes on only the top left and right of a 35 Summicron if I am using a small aperture and fairly close focus. Otherwise, it's fine. I now take the hood off for those shots.
Morry Katz
Established
You're complicating your life. Get a B+W softly graduated filter with a rotating mount, screw it into the front of the lens and go shoot.