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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> ND Filter and Polariser
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 12 of 12, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/20/2011 05:47:00 AM · #1
I am currently having 3 lenses for my nikon D80.
18-135mm f3.5-5.6
70-300mm f4-5.6
50mm f1.8

I want to buy a polariser as well as an ND filter. Since all three lenses are different, I'll have to start with buying the filter and polariser for one lens. I'm confused as to for which lens i should buy the nd filter and the polariser. Also, does having a polariser and/or an nd filter eliminate the need for buying a uv filter for my lens?

Please advice
04/20/2011 06:31:04 AM · #2
Some people use UV filters to protect the front element, some people don't. There is an endless debate about it. I do, because it isn't unusual for me to have sand and crap blowing around me and I'd rather not be super concerned about it. Stacking any filters can cause vignetting.
As for what size... if you want to save money, you can get your filters to fit the largest of your lenses and then use step-up rings to make them fit your smaller diameter lenses. Depending upon how slim your polarizer is, you may or may not get vignetting. Keep in mind, for the future, the "pro" size for filters is 77mm, so if you aspire to bigger lenses, you may want to just pony up now. Your choice on that one, though.
Step-up rings aren't ideal, but they work. The product designation will list the size of your lens filter first, then the size of the filter. So, a 52 to 67 step-up ring enables you to use a 67mm filter on a 52mm lens. This setup is sorta awkward, but it works. Keep in mind, if you do this, that you may want to purchase a separate lens cap of the filter size so you can cover it when you're using it on a smaller lens.
04/20/2011 06:45:46 AM · #3
Thanks a lot!
Also, which ND filter would be most beneficial for your normal waterfalls and daylight slow shutter speeds? As in what step range ND filter should serve the purpose?
04/20/2011 07:40:11 AM · #4
I'd say an ND8 (.9 density) would work for most things. This decreases exposure by 3 stops. An ND16 (1.2 density) might be needed in some cases (four stops). They do make variable ND filters (so you have everything from next to nothing to a ton), but they are very expensive.
Also remember that a polarizer functions as a light ND filter- it will decrease exposure to an extent. This extent varies by the polarizer, but in practice is somewhere around 1 stop and a bit more.

04/20/2011 09:05:10 AM · #5
Another thing worth considering are the Cokin filter system. You basically get a module / filter holder that can hold the filters and the polariser. This module then can be attached to different lenses using a very simple and cheap cokin filter adapter. This ends up being extremely cost effective if you are planning on using the filters on different lenses - as opposed to buying filters for each lens size.

04/20/2011 01:56:04 PM · #6
Originally posted by romil:

Thanks a lot!
Also, which ND filter would be most beneficial for your normal waterfalls and daylight slow shutter speeds? As in what step range ND filter should serve the purpose?


Buy a set of 3 ND filters. They come in a 1/2/3 stop set. Polarizers are a little different and they also tweak your colors. A standard polarizer gives you about two stops slower on the shutter speed. If you get the set of 3 ND filters, you can stack them for a configuration between 1 and 6 stops of light variation.
04/20/2011 02:06:15 PM · #7
In the debate on UV filters versus no, I've never asked the very simple question of whether anybody has actually replaced their UV filter because it's been scratched?
04/20/2011 02:17:29 PM · #8
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

In the debate on UV filters versus no, I've never asked the very simple question of whether anybody has actually replaced their UV filter because it's been scratched?


I have replaced at least one of my filters due to it getting scratched.
04/20/2011 02:50:22 PM · #9
Guys thanks a lot! Helped a lot. I'm sure to ask more when i narrow down on my options.
Thanks salmiakki,DrAchoo, jmsetzler, ceovishy and spiritualspatula!
04/20/2011 09:10:18 PM · #10
There was a post once that showed a filter that looked like it had been scrubbed with steel wool.... There was absolutely nothing wrong with the photos taken thru it. Maybe someone can find it. I had no luck.
04/20/2011 09:15:45 PM · #11
Originally posted by David Ey:

There was a post once that showed a filter that looked like it had been scrubbed with steel wool.... There was absolutely nothing wrong with the photos taken thru it. Maybe someone can find it. I had no luck.

There's another picture around of a lovely landscape, taken through a lens which looks as if it's taken a directly-centered blow with a small hammer.

On the other hand, in "super-macro" mode, my camera can focus on dust specks on the lens surface.

Message edited by author 2011-04-20 21:17:00.
04/21/2011 01:54:18 PM · #12
Mine can pick up dust specks on it's sensor.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 03:05:53 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 03:05:53 PM EDT.