DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Landscapes and Filters
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 13 of 13, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/28/2003 04:01:30 PM · #1
Hi Guys ... could you recommend filters for taking landscapes..
at the moment if I take a reading from the sky the land is too dark and from the land the sky is white...
 06/28/2003 04:39:40 PM · #2
The problem is pretty common. You need to use a graduated neutral density filter. That would be darker for the sky and transparent for the rest. The round one are usually useless as you cannot move it. The common one are the rectangular one that you slide in a filter holder, like cokin for example. it allows you to move the filter vertically.

You can look there for example : //www.outdoorphotographer.com/content/2003/aug/howto_graduated.html
Hope this help

Lionel
Originally posted by agwright:
Hi Guys ... could you recommend filters for taking landscapes..
at the moment if I take a reading from the sky the land is too dark and from the land the sky is white...


Message edited by author 2003-06-28 16:41:32.
 06/28/2003 06:51:24 PM · #3
That's interesting, lionel, i'll need to think about that. One problem i often encounter is that of ruining perfectly good shots because of a value 255 sky. And let me tell you seeing such ruined shots that would have otherwise been very, very decent does nothing for my good mood :)Those shots were taken with polarizer and changing the ev and yet the sky comes in at 255.

Now my G3 has a built in neutral density filter and it works great. Used it successfully on my Water Music for the Sound challenge. And so i have also mucked around with this feature when trying to avoid the value 255 sky and it didn't do a thing. :(


Wondering now what exactly the difference is between my G3 built in neutral density filter and the GRADUATED nd filter you describe. I don't want to buy more and more glass if I don't need it.

Message edited by author 2003-06-28 18:52:23.
 06/28/2003 07:01:43 PM · #4
Journey, I do not know what filter your g3 has but those are graduated. Look this as an exemple. With thos filter you slide the filter vertically and potentially rotate the filter holder so that the 'limit' on the filter match the 'limit' in your composition that seperate the bright part from the rest. Sorry I do not know how to explain it very well.
Lionel
 06/28/2003 07:19:05 PM · #5
Lionel, i don't know either what exactly the nd filter on my G3 is but it does work well for some things :) I suppose the graduated one is part graduated and the rest is just like plain glass? Don't you get some sort of a funny separation on images between those two aspects of the filter?

Also, in your linked example that filter is mighty expensive but presume for 58 mm i can find something a lot cheaper. Might check it out online somewhere. I suspect though that you with your 10D will need a bunch of similar filters for your various lenses? If so, that translates to major bucks when all is said and done and you also carry a lot of stuff around. Those are two 10D prospects i will not be looking forward to.
 06/28/2003 07:50:18 PM · #6
Welll I do not have one yet but there there the soft and hard one where the limit is more visible. No it does not show becasue it's close to the lens. They can be expensive you you can buy different type, I picked those one so you see what I meant.

You do not really buy a 58 mm filter. You buy a rectangular one, that goes on a filter holter and you use an adapter ring for your different lens. For example in the cokin system, the holder is 10$ and the adapter ring is 10$ and then you mount cokin filters or others as long as they are the right rectangular size. So basically people might have several of those filters, not for different lens but for potential different strength. People doing a lot of landscape would have I guess diferent density.

The thing is that .. you cannot really do that in photoshop, it's too late. If you shoot raw you might get back some details but you do need to do it when you take the shot with a filter.

But I do not have one yet, I am going to spain and france this summer and I want to buy one for the bright skies. I will be able to use them on the 2 lenses I have so far.

I cannot explain you more, I just wanted you to have the right idea of what it is. :-)
I hope this hellp ... try to read about it.

If you need one book only 'Nature Photography' by John Shaw is the best nature photography book , he has a chapter about those.

Lionel



Originally posted by Journey:
Lionel, i don't know either what exactly the nd filter on my G3 is but it does work well for some things :) I suppose the graduated one is part graduated and the rest is just like plain glass? Don't you get some sort of a funny separation on images between those two aspects of the filter?

Also, in your linked example that filter is mighty expensive but presume for 58 mm i can find something a lot cheaper. Might check it out online somewhere. I suspect though that you with your 10D will need a bunch of similar filters for your various lenses? If so, that translates to major bucks when all is said and done and you also carry a lot of stuff around. Those are two 10D prospects i will not be looking forward to.
 06/28/2003 08:01:07 PM · #7
Originally posted by Journey:
Lionel, i don't know either what exactly the nd filter on my G3 is but it does work well for some things :) I suppose the graduated one is part graduated and the rest is just like plain glass? Don't you get some sort of a funny separation on images between those two aspects of the filter?

Also, in your linked example that filter is mighty expensive but presume for 58 mm i can find something a lot cheaper. Might check it out online somewhere. I suspect though that you with your 10D will need a bunch of similar filters for your various lenses? If so, that translates to major bucks when all is said and done and you also carry a lot of stuff around. Those are two 10D prospects i will not be looking forward to.


Helene, the ND filter in your G3 provides a 3-stop light reduction. The graduated ND filters are indeed a great tool for landscape. I don't own one either, and won't until I upgrade to DSLR. You are better off than I, since you can shoot RAW, and that will definitely give you an advantage in retaining detail in the sky. You'll still face the issue of how to ccompress the higher dymanic range when you save to 24-bit color.
 06/28/2003 08:34:10 PM · #8
Kirbic, i just had a quick look at an online site for grad nd filters. They come at 2x, 4x, 6x and cost $20 each for 58 mm.

As to acquisitions for the G3, i'm getting into a real bind. Since getting the teleconverter i have gotten a real hunger for bigger lenses and lenses that are really zoom lenses. So, my thinking is towards a 10D next year. I got the G3 just two months ago, with which i'm very happy, in order to learn photography and really because i wasn't worthy of a 10D then and didn't want to spend that much money without knowing my real commitment to photography. That's all there now and so i know i will be moving dslr. In the meantime i also want to get the most out of the G3 and since nature photography is my main thing perhaps i will get ONE of those grad nd filters. Any suggestions what might be best of the three options?

Btw, i haven't shot RAW all that much just because i didn't have enough cf. Just ordered more and will start shooting in RAW. The G3 has this great feature that you can shoot in superfine and right after the shot you can convert it to RAW if you're happy with the shot.

Message edited by author 2003-06-28 20:35:33.
 06/28/2003 08:57:23 PM · #9
Just be careful, I do not know what you call a 58mm grad filter, but if it's round, you will have the separation in the middle I guess and will will be force to compose your landscape with it. Maybe they do it at 1/3 but still .. you will not have flexibility.
on the g3 you have a thread, do I would recommand you to look at the cokin system with rectangular filter. You will still have it for your future 10D i suppose.

Lionel

Originally posted by Journey:
Kirbic, i just had a quick look at an online site for grad nd filters. They come at 2x, 4x, 6x and cost $20 each for 58 mm.

As to acquisitions for the G3, i'm getting into a real bind. Since getting the teleconverter i have gotten a real hunger for bigger lenses and lenses that are really zoom lenses. So, my thinking is towards a 10D next year. I got the G3 just two months ago, with which i'm very happy, in order to learn photography and really because i wasn't worthy of a 10D then and didn't want to spend that much money without knowing my real commitment to photography. That's all there now and so i know i will be moving dslr. In the meantime i also want to get the most out of the G3 and since nature photography is my main thing perhaps i will get ONE of those grad nd filters. Any suggestions what might be best of the three options?

Btw, i haven't shot RAW all that much just because i didn't have enough cf. Just ordered more and will start shooting in RAW. The G3 has this great feature that you can shoot in superfine and right after the shot you can convert it to RAW if you're happy with the shot.
 06/28/2003 09:02:57 PM · #10
Hi Helene,
I would go with the 4x. The 2x is only one stop light reduction, and you want a bit more than that typically. The 6x may be useful, but if I were buying today adn choosing just one, I would start with the 4x.
I really hear you on the 10D. That is really an attractive piece of hardware. I really have no current investment in glass, so next year I will be looking at both Canon & Nikon. If I had to choose now, I think the 10D would be my choice, edging out the D100.
 06/28/2003 09:14:39 PM · #11
Thanks to you both. Lionel, when i said 58 mm i meant to fit my 58 mm bayonet. But thanks for the warning, i will look very carefully before buying anything. Kirbic, what you said on 4x makes sense.

Just out of curiosity, Lionel, mind mentioning what your investment in the 10D and important lenses plus their filters is going to add up to, without going overboard on nice-but-will-be-seldom-used lenses, such as those giving a lot of distortion? I was thinking it would be $ 2,500 - $ 3,000 ballpark. Curious whether that it is realistic.

Message edited by author 2003-06-28 21:17:29.
 06/28/2003 10:04:19 PM · #12
hard to know. depend what you need and what lens you want. The 28-135 is a good lens to start 400$. But for landscape you would probably need a wide angle as with the crop factor of 1.6, it makes it a 45-200mm.
It makes it a good staring package at 1900$.

Then .. you add with your needs and envies and .. and .. !

for landscape you can look at that thread on dpreview everybody is recommending different lens. Some people shoot landscape with wide, some with standard, some with tele !


It all depends on the lenses. What you have to think about is that you build a system. A lens you buy now, will work on your 11D and 12D ;-)
It depends if you are the zoom type or not. Different people would recommend you different lenses.

Potential other buy depending on your needs would be :
- good tripod , not less than 100$
- external flash 150$ for the canon 420EX (that would work on your g3 by the way), a friend of me use it on a g2

Your 2500-3000 ball park sounds realistic to me.

Originally posted by Journey:
Thanks to you both. Lionel, when i said 58 mm i meant to fit my 58 mm bayonet. But thanks for the warning, i will look very carefully before buying anything. Kirbic, what you said on 4x makes sense.

Just out of curiosity, Lionel, mind mentioning what your investment in the 10D and important lenses plus their filters is going to add up to, without going overboard on nice-but-will-be-seldom-used lenses, such as those giving a lot of distortion? I was thinking it would be $ 2,500 - $ 3,000 ballpark. Curious whether that it is realistic.


Message edited by author 2003-06-28 22:07:43.
 06/28/2003 10:40:41 PM · #13
It's not legal here but a common technique in both film and digital photography is to take a double exposure. With a tripod (important) take one shot with a faster shutter speed to properly expose the sky, and then, without moving the camera (just adjust the shutter speed) take one exposed for the ground. Then, combine them in Photoshop later on. It's cheaper than a graduated neutral density filter and will yield better results if done properly.

James.

Originally posted by agwright:
Hi Guys ... could you recommend filters for taking landscapes..
at the moment if I take a reading from the sky the land is too dark and from the land the sky is white...
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/08/2025 08:26:17 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/08/2025 08:26:17 AM EDT.