Image Quality Of This Graduated ND Filter (Comparison Shots)

[decado]

So I'm wondering what you guys think of the image quality of this graduated ND filter, is it a keeper or not? Let me know if you need me to post different pictures (and of what), it does sufficiently darken the sky so I do know that for sure, this is strictly about image quality. Images shot with a 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM @ 400ISO f/4 1/20.

With ND Filter:

Without ND Filter:

 

[decado]

Can no one help me out here?

 

[UUilliam]

smaller images please? took me 10 seconds to load.

 

[decado]

Now that it's loaded what's the problem? Lol. Anyways, when judging the quality of the filter shouldn't it be a full size image?

 

[battletone]

Now that it's loaded what's the problem? Lol. Anyways, when judging the quality of the filter shouldn't it be a full size image?

Absolutely not. 800px would be plenty.

 

[decado]

There, resized. Now, did you guys actually have something to say about the quality of the filter or did you just come to complain about the file size?

 

[UUilliam]

first off, Your white balance is off.
secondly. Why use a ND filter in this situation?
I could see the force if there was an area that kept over-exposing or if you were trying to capture a bit of motion in the fan...
the only difference is the top one is darker.

 

[decado]

first off, Your white balance is off.
secondly. Why use a ND filter in this situation?
I could see the force if there was an area that kept over-exposing or if you were trying to capture a bit of motion in the fan...
the only difference is the top one is darker.

I think you misunderstand me, these pictures aren't meant to be artistic photos, they're just random pictures I took as a comparison for the image quality. I'm just wondering what someone with a more discerning eye than mine thinks of the clarity of this filter, that's all. I don't know if I need a picture of something or if I just need to take a picture of something simple like a piece of paper to best see the clarity of the filter so I just posted a random picture that I took with and without the ND filter attached.

 

[bp4life71]

first off, Your white balance is off.
secondly. Why use a ND filter in this situation?
I could see the force if there was an area that kept over-exposing or if you were trying to capture a bit of motion in the fan...
the only difference is the top one is darker.

I think you misunderstand me, these pictures aren't meant to be artistic photos, they're just random pictures I took as a comparison for the image quality. I'm just wondering what someone with a more discerning eye than mine thinks of the clarity of this filter, that's all. I don't know if I need a picture of something or if I just need to take a picture of something simple like a piece of paper to best see the clarity of the filter so I just posted a random picture that I took with and without the ND filter attached.

I can't see much of a difference. It looks like the top one with the filter is slightly brighter, and maybe a bit sharper. But thats my untrained eye.

 

[decado]

So this $35 tiffen ND filter is decent then? No one thinks it looks unclear?

 

[tirediron]

I understand what you're trying to do, but this "test" isn't going to tell you anything. Head outside on a sunny day, point into the sun, and shoot a bright, shiny patch of water. As well, there should be something such as the leaves on a tree by which you can accurately judge sharpness.

 

[ErectedGryphon]

They look the same to me, you need to clean your fan blades

 

[decado]

I understand what you're trying to do, but this "test" isn't going to tell you anything. Head outside on a sunny day, point into the sun, and shoot a bright, shiny patch of water. As well, there should be something such as the leaves on a tree by which you can accurately judge sharpness.

Hmm, ok, as soon as it's nice out again I'll get a couple comparison shots then bump this thread or make a new one. Like I said, I wasn't sure what I should be getting shots of for this comparison.