What's best to use on my DSLR (D70s) in terms of filters for bluebird days, grey bird days, twilight, etc.
Thanks, looking to make some sweet photos with my new toy.
Printable View
What's best to use on my DSLR (D70s) in terms of filters for bluebird days, grey bird days, twilight, etc.
Thanks, looking to make some sweet photos with my new toy.
it totally depends on what you want to do with the shot
id say some neutral density's might be your best friend given the fact that its always white \ highly reflective where we shoot and hard to get the shutter we want sometimes.
polarizers for blue birds when you wanna darken the sky or remove glare from anything. Remember though, while they can be used as on off switches play around with varying degrees of polarization.
people will probably say UV filters too and to always at least shoot with that on there for protection. IMO, I didnt pay 300-700 for good glass just to reduce photo quality by a 20$ filter. Might as well use a lens cap with a keeper\lanyard.
Ive never got to play with them, but maybe pickup an enhancing filter if you have the $$$.
also got lens hoods for blue bird days, esp wide angles?
lens flare can be annoying if you dont want it
it totally depends on what you want to do with the shot
id say some neutral density's might be your best friend given the fact that its always white \ highly reflective where we shoot and hard to get the shutter we want sometimes.
polarizers for blue birds when you wanna darken the sky or remove glare from anything. Remember though, while they can be used as on off switches play around with varying degrees of polarization.
people will probably say UV filters too and to always at least shoot with that on there for protection. IMO, I didnt pay 300-700 for good glass just to reduce photo quality by a 20$ filter. Might as well use a lens cap with a keeper\lanyard.
Ive never got to play with them, but maybe pickup an enhancing filter if you have the $$$.
also got lens hoods for blue bird days, esp wide angles?
lens flare can be annoying if you dont want it
it totally depends on what you want to do with the shot
id say some neutral density's might be your best friend given the fact that its always white \ highly reflective where we shoot and hard to get the shutter we want sometimes.
polarizers for blue birds when you wanna darken the sky or remove glare from anything. Remember though, while they can be used as on off switches play around with varying degrees of polarization.
people will probably say UV filters too and to always at least shoot with that on there for protection. IMO, I didnt pay 300-700 for good glass just to reduce photo quality by a 20$ filter. Might as well use a lens cap with a keeper\lanyard.
Ive never got to play with them, but maybe pickup an enhancing filter if you have the $$$.
also got lens hoods for blue bird days, esp wide angles?
lens flare can be annoying if you dont want it
whoa...the elusive triple post. . .
if you're planning to shoot action, you probly won't have much need for a neutral density filter since you'll largely be shooting at 1/1000 of a second with an ISO of 200 on the D70 and with a shutter speed that fast you will often be looking for more light, not less, especially when the clouds roll in.
regarding UV/Haze filters. . . it's a valid argument to not put that over an expensive lens, but the contrasting valid arguement would have a person using one to protect that super spendy lens. And i can say first hand that if I didn't have a UV filter over my lenses one of them would have been toast a few years ago when the UV filter shattered (with the lens cap on, mind you, which actually got lodged into the ring of the filter as well) so without that filter, my whole lens would have been fucked. replacing the filter is a shit ton cheaper than replacing the lens. So I would fall into the category of "Firm believer in the UV/Haze filter." For what it's worth to ya.
So, your saying no filter aside from a UV? Won't I get mad glare off the snow on a bluebird day?
doh
I guess I should have chilled when i got a technical error 3 times.
you wont get flare if you keep the sun off the lens by using the proper lens hood that doesnt vignette. Not too much of an issue with photo to telephoto lenses but starts to become an issue around 35ish and lower mm. Im very happy that my sigma 12-24 has a permanent lens hood built onto the lens.
I still think you have a place for nuetral densities despite what anyone would say. This is especially true if you like to shoot nature shots at all, especially macro ones to control DOF better.
edit: oh yea, if you do buy a polarizer and want ND's, you can use the polarizer as a ~2.5 stop ND. Also regarding polarizers, make sure to get a circular one so it doesnt mess with your light meter.
I guess Im also a bit unfamiliar with being able to change ISO's whenever you want with a digital camera. Im still loving the amount of control I get by pulling Iflord PanF+ 50 to ISO32 and hand developing it myself.
Anyway, have fun and dont stop shooting.
You can go from a clear filter to keep dust and crap off the lens (and have it protected from getting scarred prematurely from constant cleaning) to a UV/haze to a polarizer. You'll need to do a test roll to get the compensation right on the polarizing filter.
remember to push the exposure down to -1 on sunny days and up to +1 on grey days.....simple change but works for me
if your exposure is set properly, glare off the snow shouldn't be a huge issue, but you may want to experiment with the polarizer.
The neutral density filters are certainly useful for landscape shots as pechelman said, but probly not so much for action. So that depends on what you plan to shoot alot of.
some people like to use a red filter when they are shooting black and white film to get that super dark sky effect on a bluebird day, though i'm not sure how that translates when shooting digi and converting to B&W. Probly pretty similar if you convert it properly.
in general, in terms of shooting on days when the difference is bluebird, greybird, or twilight, you just want to get the white balance and the exposure down and don't need to spend money on a bunch of filters for those situations (especially since you can control the white balance in-camera).
If you're gonna be shooting a bunch of action and getting more into photo, you might want check out www.WheelsAndWax.com, super good website with a bunch of forums, articles, advice, etc. and the ONLY photo site dedicated to action sports (ski, board, surf, bike, etc), instead of team/stick-and-ball sports.
(also, if you've got the software to handle it, it's reccomended that you shoot in the camera raw format (.NEF files for Nikon), it will give you much more control over your images)
There are only two filters you want for digital photography: Circ-Pol and UV0
Circular Polarizer: Turns blown out skies into gorgeous blue, also usefull for window reflections... only limited application for snow glare (as these reflections are not strongly polarized). Also works as a variable ND (~2) for something like moving water (also great for enhancing or eliminating reflection). It can also increase saturation a bit. For best results, it is imperitive to learn the physics behind this tool so you will know when and how to maximize its effects.
UV0 (not Sky1A or Haze2)- Physical lens protection only. A $50 filter is cheaper than losing your front element. Most DSLR sensors are not sensitive enough to UV for this to affect the blue haze phenomenon even at high altitude. A lens hood will do far more to protect your lens than a UV0. A lens hood also increases contrast and decreases flare. I use both.
Just about any other filter is superfluous if you are shooting digital as you can replicate just about all other filter effects in post (certain rare earth enhancement filters and graduated NDs excepted).
Get a quality filter with multicoating: Hoya HMC or SHMC or B+W.
Tiffen TMC if you are on the cheap. Do not stack filters. If you have a superwide angle you may need to purchase a thin filter to prevent vignetting.
+1 to what summit said.
If you like spending time in front of a computer and have Photoshop you can replicate a graduated ND there as well (but I like using gradND filters):
http://www.fredmiranda.com/article_2/
cj001f that is a great link! Thank you! I'm definately going to use that technique this summer! :)
(I had a cokin grad ND but it's gone and it only fit the 58mm holder).
NO! NO! NO!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by splat
The filter factor is variable dependent on the degree and angle of polarization of the light coming in and the polarization angle chosen. You must use TTL metering with a polarizer or you are just guessing.
Just because you bought yourself an $400 incidence meter doesn't mean you should always use it. In truth, incidence meters do not have great application in action photography. It is a necessity to learn the quirks of reflective metering. This is escecially true in tricky lighting of action (trees, shadows, chutes). You are far better off with a spot reflectivity meter (and your EOS 1v is well equiped). You learn what reflectivity things have, snow especially. You will learn how the aspect of one drift can change the exposure from the next and how to integrate your readings. Then you figure out what you want your final image to look like. Ansel called this previsualization. See it all in your mind. You meter and set your exposure accordingly. It will yield supreior results to the ambient-guide-compensate method when you cannot actually walk to each area in your scene to meter the incident light. You should be able to accomplish this with some practice. I strongly recommend reading Ansel's books, specifically the opening chapters of The Negative to better understand this philosophy.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/082...lance&n=283155