Why no digital ND filter in DSLR's?

[lensfactory]

I think the Canon G10's 'digital' built in ND filters are a great feature and I wonder....is it not possible to add this feature into DSLR's? Hell..why stop there..how about a graduated ND or some other filters?

Anyone know why this is not feasible and/or the technical info on this idea?

[DarkPenguin]

I believe the G10's ND filter is a physical 3 stop ND filter built into the lens.  Enable the feature and it is pushed into place.

[francois]

I believe the G10's ND filter is a physical 3 stop ND filter built into the lens.  Enable the feature and it is pushed into place.

It would be complex to build such a system in a DSLR and I'm sure that it would noz be useful enough to justify the added expense.

[Dick Roadnight]

I think the Canon G10's 'digital' built in ND filters are a great feature and I wonder....is it not possible to add this feature into DSLR's? Hell..why stop there..how about a graduated ND or some other filters?

Anyone know why this is not feasible and/or the technical info on this idea?

To digitally give the effect of a ND filter, you only need to offer lower ISO sensitivity settings.

[Panopeeper]

To digitally give the effect of a ND filter, you only need to offer lower ISO sensitivity settings.

There is no point to lower the ISO under the native setting. ISO this or ISO that, nothing helps if the well gets saturated.

[BJL]

I think the Canon G10's 'digital' built in ND filters are a great feature and I wonder....is it not possible to add this feature into DSLR's? Hell..why stop there..how about a graduated ND or some other filters?

Anyone know why this is not feasible and/or the technical info on this idea?

There is far less need for a built-in ND filter with the far larger sensors of SLRs. With a small sensor compact like the G10, the NF filter is sometimes useful to get long enough exposure times in bright light, because diffraction makes it unwise to stop down below about f/8 (some would say about f/4). With an SLR, diffraction only becomes an issue at a considerably higher (slower) f-stop, so even with the same minimum ISO speed, a DSLR has far more exposure level flexibility before a ND filter is needed.

[jani]

There is far less need for a built-in ND filter with the far larger sensors of SLRs. With a small sensor compact like the G10, the NF filter is sometimes useful to get long enough exposure times in bright light, because diffraction makes it unwise to stop down below about f/8 (some would say about f/4). With an SLR, diffraction only becomes an issue at a considerably higher (slower) f-stop, so even with the same minimum ISO speed, a DSLR has far more exposure level flexibility before a ND filter is needed.

With today's DSLR sensor resolutions, diffraction is an increasing problem.

Even ignoring that, a ND filter makes it easier to leverage shallow DoF effects.

SLRs already have a mirror assembly. Is it so much of a stretch to consider adding a ND filter system to that?

Yes, it will increase mechanical complexity in the camera, and that means it will be more expensive to make, and more error prone.

[DarkPenguin]

With today's DSLR sensor resolutions, diffraction is an increasing problem.

Even ignoring that, a ND filter makes it easier to leverage shallow DoF effects.

SLRs already have a mirror assembly. Is it so much of a stretch to consider adding a ND filter system to that?

Yes, it will increase mechanical complexity in the camera, and that means it will be more expensive to make, and more error prone.

It will increase the size of the camera, too.

[lensfactory]

Is the G10 ND filter actually mechanical? I figured it was just an electronic adaptation of some sort.
I am , obviously, in want of an ND to go well below what could be offered even at my slowest stting (lowest ISO and highest aperture) to be able to use shallower DOF and longer shutters.
I think it would be easy to do this electronically...allowa a reduction of ISO down to say  25 or somesuch.

[BJL]

With today's DSLR sensor resolutions, diffraction is an increasing problem.
Even ignoring that, a ND filter makes it easier to leverage shallow DoF effects.
...
Yes, it will increase mechanical complexity in the camera, and that means it will be more expensive to make, and more error prone.

I agree that there is _some_ need for ND filters with SLR's, but it is far less than with compacts: my guess is that the great majority of SLR users never have a need for (non-graduated) ND filters. And externally mounted filters are easy enough to use, so that is the better solution, rather than adding some cost, bulk, and complexity to a camera when most owners will never use the feature.

[jani]

It will increase the size of the camera, too.

Yes, perhaps with 1-2 mm or so in one direction or the other. Or perhaps it could be integrated into the mirror itself, which isn't really 100% reflective in the first place, in which case you'll not lose anything, except some mirror slap.

[lensfactory]

It seems to me...that with this 'convergence' of video and DSLR...a built in ND or ISO expansion would be just the thing. It's simple to do...and NO..the G10 is not an actual physical ND...more like ISO expansion.

[DarkPenguin]

It seems to me...that with this 'convergence' of video and DSLR...a built in ND or ISO expansion would be just the thing. It's simple to do...and NO..the G10 is not an actual physical ND...more like ISO expansion.

Do you have a reference for that?  I actually checked number of reviews which seemed to indicate it was a physical device.

Here is one reference to that ...

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....st&p=248243

[jani]

The optical ND filter appears to have been this was introduced with the G3 (no mention in the press release, but in the specs), and was definitely there in the G5.

I find no indication that this feature has changed in the G series afterwards.

[lensfactory]

No..I don't have any reference. I just switched it on....and it is dead silent and just 'seems' there is no mechanical process occuring. Regardless....ISO expansion then....this could be easily implemented,no?
Wouldn't it be great to shoot 1.4 outside during the day? Or do time exposures....
If they can expand it 1 stop (as they do on the Canon dslr's...why not expand it 4 stops?
Would be a lot more useful than most of the other doodads they add with each new model.

[DarkPenguin]

No..I don't have any reference. I just switched it on....and it is dead silent and just 'seems' there is no mechanical process occuring. Regardless....ISO expansion then....this could be easily implemented,no?
Wouldn't it be great to shoot 1.4 outside during the day? Or do time exposures....
If they can expand it 1 stop (as they do on the Canon dslr's...why not expand it 4 stops?
Would be a lot more useful than most of the other doodads they add with each new model.

Gabor explained this elsewhere.  When the wells are full, they're full.  So you'll lose those stops in DR.  If you want an additional 3 stops just over expose by 3 stops and hope everything stays within your reduced DR.

(And, yes it would be useful.  The sensors just do not work that way.)

[lensfactory]

Well....I think it would be pretty easy. They keep designing sensors with expanded dynamic range and higher sensitivity. A 'less' sensitive filter is probably not much of a technical challenge.  I just don't think it's given much thought by the 'old guard' camera manufacturers, as it probably isn't the highest priority when it comes to a sensor's overall usefulness.
They don't listen to photographer much anyway.... if they did all Live View DSLR's would have articulated screens, and there are many more I could come up with.
I bet Sony or Panasonic , or one of the 'new' kids comes up with this feature....I said it here first.

[jani]

Well....I think it would be pretty easy. They keep designing sensors with expanded dynamic range and higher sensitivity. A 'less' sensitive filter is probably not much of a technical challenge.  I just don't think it's given much thought by the 'old guard' camera manufacturers, as it probably isn't the highest priority when it comes to a sensor's overall usefulness.
They don't listen to photographer much anyway.... if they did all Live View DSLR's would have articulated screens, and there are many more I could come up with.
I bet Sony or Panasonic , or one of the 'new' kids comes up with this feature....I said it here first.

Fujifilm has had "this feature" for years; an additional set of sensor wells that take care of the highlights. They call it SuperCCD SR, and it's been known for about ten years. So sorry, you didn't say it first.

But it doesn't give a three stop advantage, and it has some disadvantages that you may or may not be happy about.

[lensfactory]

Fujifilm has had "this feature" for years; an additional set of sensor wells that take care of the highlights. They call it SuperCCD SR, and it's been known for about ten years. So sorry, you didn't say it first.

But it doesn't give a three stop advantage, and it has some disadvantages that you may or may not be happy about.

Thats just increased DR..that's not what I am talking about at all. I am talking about ISO expansion or Digtital ND. The ability to set a lower ISO by 3-4 stops than the lowest setting.

[DarkPenguin]

Thats just increased DR..that's not what I am talking about at all. I am talking about ISO expansion or Digtital ND. The ability to set a lower ISO by 3-4 stops than the lowest setting.

What are you looking for?  A jpeg mode that does this?  Otherwise you have it with raw.  Just over expose by 3-4 stops.  Develop appropriately.  Your DR will be greatly reduced but that's how sensors work.