Lee SW150 Filter Starter Kit

[Jenno]

The SW150 is a filter system is made by the Lee Filter Co specifically for the Nikon 14-24 and has only just been released to the market after many months in the making. Prior to this system becoming available, my 14-24 stayed in the camera bag for the sunrise/sunset shots in favour of the 17-35 which does take filters.
Supplies of the SW150 even now are very scarce (which is the case for many of Lees products) and I note that B&H are out of stock and not expecting supplies in for 6+ weeks.
The system is not cheap - B&H is one of the cheapest at US $375 + shipping. Vanbar has exactly the same starter kit for $660.

So what do you get for your money?

• 1X 170X150 ND Grad Hard .6 (2 stop) resin filter + case
• 1 X Mounting collar
• 1 X Compression ring
• Filter holder +case
• 1 X Neoprene lens cover
• 2 X Baffles
• 1 X cleaning cloth
• Directions for assembly



Once the mounting collar is fitted to the lens it can remain there as the filter holder can be fitted and removed as and when required. In this situation, the Lee neoprene lens cover can be used as a substitute for the Nikon supplied lens cap.






I was expecting the filter holder to take 2 filters but the standard filter holder as delivered is only configured for 1. The filter holder however rotates 360 degrees.




Based on the promotional material that I had seen, I wasn’t expecting the inclusion of baffles as part of the kit. I did try some shots without the baffles but believe me they are there for a good reason.

Here is a pic showing the baffles and comparing the SW150 to the standard 100mm filter holder



...and here is what happens without the baffles in place. Take note of the top corners



Even with the baffles in place, I did (on some occasions) note some annoying stray reflections affecting the image which thankfully could be fixed in PP. I didn’t note any vignetting on any of the images.



No issues with this one.



....and one for Gerry




One other useful accessory well worth considering is a system adaptor which allows you to attach the 170X150 filter holder and filters onto any standard Lee adaptor ring enabling its use on other lenses i.e. the SW150 filter holder and filters can be used on say the Nikon 17-35mm lens.





Comparison of the 170X150 and the 100mm filters



In summary, the kit is not cheap but it does allow the use of what is regarded as one of the best wide angle lenses on the market in situations that previously you wern't able to.

[aim54x]

Nice stuff!! Now I guess my reservations against getting a 14-24 are fast disappearing!

Great to see someone sharing their thoughts on something that they have purchased and using.

May I ask the pricing for this kit?

[Jenno]

The system is not cheap - B&H is one of the cheapest at US $375 + shipping. Vanbar has exactly the same starter kit for $660.

[biggerry]

Nice little review Ray, great to see someone taking the time to share their experience with a product.

I really like the neoprene lens cover, that would be a great addition to alot of filter kits when you can't get the lens cap on.

....and one for Gerry

nioce...loving that green moss/weed, where is that at?

[Murray Foote]

Thanks for the information, Jenno. You provide a very tangible illustration of the kit and very useful example images.

I've just purchased a 14-24mm so this is of particular interest to me though I have yet to use it in sunset/ sunrise situations. (I also have a 17-35mm for that matter).

I realise it's the conventional thing to say a graduated ND filter is useful for such situations but I still wonder how useful. In image 2, the cliffs on the left are noticeably darker at the top as a consequence and probably because of that, you have perhaps not come down as far with it in the sky as you might have. I think that's a handicap for the image. Image 3 is a classic case for a grad ND and works very well. Image 4, I'm not completely sure how you've used it. I suspect you've used it diagonally and sacrificed the top left rock at the left to get better gradation on the cliffs at the right. If so, I suspect that rock would have been better with more detail.

To have a 14-24mm you have to be using it with at least a D3/D700 and these cameras have a very wide dynamic range, much more than slide film and even more for the D3x and D3s. The data from Clarkvision is confusing and inconsistent but suggests a dynamic range for the d3 or say 12 stops declining to about 9 by 6400ISO. In many circumstances that may be sufficient. Of course you get rapid reductions in the quality of image data from well-exposed highlight areas to shadow areas (or even midtones for that matter) so a single exposure may not be ideal even if possible.

Another approach is then to combine multiple exposures, perhaps 3 exposures 2 stops apart, maybe just 2, requires testing, easy enough on a D3. Then combine them either manually or as natural HDR. I think this would be my preferred approach, especially as I am probably more interested in time exposures after sunset where the dynamic range is likely to be lower.

Of course, everyone has different approaches and I've never used grad NDs much, even with slide film. Also, I'm reasonably competent in post-processing, which some people try to avoid. So if it's a relevant question to you, how useful do you find the ND grads compared to optimising a single image and to combining multiple images?

[Jenno]

where is that at

Merimbula on the Far South Coast of NSW.
Spent a week there so was able to take Nana naps during the day to compensate for the early starts

Thanks for your comments Murray

In image 2

Image 2 was included specifically to show the extraneous reflection that occurred which, unfortunately, was not restricted to this image. Occurs more frequently when the light source is behind the camera which makes sense

To have a 14-24mm you have to be using it with at least a D3/D700

All images were taken with a D700.

Of course, everyone has different approaches and I've never used grad NDs much, even with slide film. Also, I'm reasonably competent in post-processing, which some people try to avoid. So if it's a relevant question to you, how useful do you find the ND grads compared to optimising a single image and to combining multiple images?

I would prefer to spend time capturing (thrill of the chase) rather than processing images and my PP competencies are somewhat limited but growing gradually. I have seen some great results from combining images and am keen to explore this technique in the future.

[Murray Foote]

OK, presuming this may be useful:

Ways to combine multiple images:

- Manually in Photoshop. You open two images as layers in Photoshop: (1) you can do this by opening two images and shift-dragging one to the other; (2) you can directly do it from Lightroom - open as layers in Photoshop. Then in either case, the top image will show. You add a mask to the top image (washing machine icon at the bottom of the Layers palette) and paint parts of the mask with black to show parts of the lower image (set paint opacity to less than 100% if you need to paint gradually)
- Blend in CS5. You can do this in previous versions of Photoshop but CS5 is so much better. From Lightroom you can "Merge to HDRPro in Photoshop" or open some images in Photoshop and use Edit/Auto-Blend Layers...
- Photomatix. Costs about $100 and you can find discount codes on the web. In this case, exposure fusion is the option you want.
- The "donationware" Lightroom plugin LR/Enfuse may be worth checking out (I haven't got to it yet).

A lot to be said for optimising images in camera, of course. And it's all too easy to get chained to the computer....

[Jenno]

Thanks Murray.
Will give it a try