Big beautiful blue skies
Posted 07/02/2008 - 20:41
Link
Hi Robby, Did you use a polarizer?
Take a good look . It might not be there when you return.
Posted 07/02/2008 - 21:57
Link
Hi - No, should I have? I've not got any filters at all.
Only thing I did use was my legs as I got chased off from inside that Tate and Lyle plant by some jobsworth security guard
Only thing I did use was my legs as I got chased off from inside that Tate and Lyle plant by some jobsworth security guard
Posted 07/02/2008 - 22:16
Link
robby wrote:
Hi - No, should I have? I've not got any filters at all. . . snip
Hi - No, should I have? I've not got any filters at all. . . snip
Not a question of whether you should have or not, it just looks as if you did! A polarizing filter has the effect of darkening blue skies and reducing haze. If you didn't use one and didn't tweak the colours in post processing then you had a cracking day!
We could do with a bit of blue sky round here at the moment as we are in the middle of the harmattan - a dry dusty wind that blows off the sahara and gets dust everywhere. Ah, perhaps I've finally found my excuse to upgrade to the K10D - dust seals
Thanks for sharing,
Steve
Posted 07/02/2008 - 22:38
Link
Great pics...sharp and nice colour...seems a particular clear day!
Dunno if it is bad taste to butt in on other users threads with your own pictures...if so I deeply apologize...just wanted to show you a nice blue sky obtained with my K10D and a P-FA 50mm f1.4 last weekend - no filters, no sharpening, no tweaking of colors...only post-processing was a cropping for better composition.

Dunno if it is bad taste to butt in on other users threads with your own pictures...if so I deeply apologize...just wanted to show you a nice blue sky obtained with my K10D and a P-FA 50mm f1.4 last weekend - no filters, no sharpening, no tweaking of colors...only post-processing was a cropping for better composition.

Posted 07/02/2008 - 22:51
Link
Lovely shots, Robbie. Ravishing colour.
G
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 08/02/2008 - 08:34
Link
Great series Robby, really like it!
With the blue of the skies it does help to expose a little bit on the low side (as you did by the (beautiful) looks of it).
Cheers,
Prieni
With the blue of the skies it does help to expose a little bit on the low side (as you did by the (beautiful) looks of it).
Cheers,
Prieni
How inappropriate to call this planet earth when it is quite clearly Ocean. - Arthur C. Clarke
Prieni's PPG page
Prieni's PPG page
Posted 08/02/2008 - 09:20
Link
Yup! Lovely luscious colours!
Matt
Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)
(For gallery, tips and links)
Posted 08/02/2008 - 20:42
Link
There are two reasons not to use a polarizer with the 10-20mm... one is the cost of a 77mm polarizer, and the other is that the angle of view is so large.
The second problem means that there are areas of sky where the polarizer works, and other areas where it doesn't (since the polarizer only works properly at one angle, yet the amount of sky covers a huge set of different angles). This can give rise to a band of dark sky with normal sky each side, no matter what the orientation of the polarizer is.
The lens seems to bring out deep blue sky all on its own anyway - I like the pictures.
The second problem means that there are areas of sky where the polarizer works, and other areas where it doesn't (since the polarizer only works properly at one angle, yet the amount of sky covers a huge set of different angles). This can give rise to a band of dark sky with normal sky each side, no matter what the orientation of the polarizer is.
The lens seems to bring out deep blue sky all on its own anyway - I like the pictures.
Posted 08/02/2008 - 20:51
Link
Thanks for that km - I've learnt something today
The near half moon round glass of the outer element and the filter in a vertical plane - makes sense when you think about it.
By the way km, your infrared gallery is bl**dy fantastic
The near half moon round glass of the outer element and the filter in a vertical plane - makes sense when you think about it.
By the way km, your infrared gallery is bl**dy fantastic
Posted 08/02/2008 - 22:28
Link
Karma
you are oh, so right re polarizers on wide angle lenses.
I have problems with 28mm!
you are oh, so right re polarizers on wide angle lenses.
I have problems with 28mm!
Mac from Montreal
SP, SPII, SPF, PZ-10, P30, SFX, K110D, istDS, Optio 60, Z-10, H90, RZ10, I-10, f3.5 28mm, f1.8 55mm, f1.4 50mm, f3.5 135mm, f2.5 135mm, f4 50mm Macro, f4.5 80-200 F, f4 35-70, f3.5 28-80, f3.5 35-135, f3.5 18-55, f1.8 31mm Ltd., two Auto 110's, Auto 110 lenses and filters, tubes, bellows, Manfrottos and a sore back.
SP, SPII, SPF, PZ-10, P30, SFX, K110D, istDS, Optio 60, Z-10, H90, RZ10, I-10, f3.5 28mm, f1.8 55mm, f1.4 50mm, f3.5 135mm, f2.5 135mm, f4 50mm Macro, f4.5 80-200 F, f4 35-70, f3.5 28-80, f3.5 35-135, f3.5 18-55, f1.8 31mm Ltd., two Auto 110's, Auto 110 lenses and filters, tubes, bellows, Manfrottos and a sore back.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
63 posts
17 years
Liverpool,
England
The colour and clarity of an early spring blue sky doesn't half perk my spirits up
1/400 5.6 100 10mm (Sigma 10-20)
1/400 5.6 100 11mm (Sigma 10-20)
1/400 5.6 100 10mm (Sigma 10-20)
1/400 4.0 100 10mm (Sigma 10-20)