Landscape Filters
Posted 22/11/2009 - 07:52
Link
I'm using Cokin P series, because I can't afford Lee, rather than any technical reason. I only tend to carry a couple with me when out in the hills, ND2 and a Grey, I also have a Hoya circular Polarizers. However I don't use filters nearly enough or get the dramatic effect that some members of the site have.
Posted 22/11/2009 - 12:02
Link
Cokin Z-pro here because I got a good deal on them.
Besides that I use a polariser 90% of the time.
Don't shoot many landscapes though
Besides that I use a polariser 90% of the time.
Don't shoot many landscapes though
Posted 22/11/2009 - 12:45
Link
I own Cokin P, but i would advise you not to invest in them as they leave a magenta cast when stacked.. so only useful for sunsets/rises really, and then still quite annoying
Theres a kit made by HiTech/Formatt that fit the Cokin P system, which I've heard great things about, and are a similar price.
http://www.formatt.co.uk/stills-filters/filters/graduated-n-d/stills-filters.asp...
Theres a kit made by HiTech/Formatt that fit the Cokin P system, which I've heard great things about, and are a similar price.
http://www.formatt.co.uk/stills-filters/filters/graduated-n-d/stills-filters.asp...
http://www.behance.net/robbranigan
K20D, DA18-55II, FA50 1.4, DA10-17
To buy: Metz 58 AF-1, DA*50-135, DA12-24, DA100M
K20D, DA18-55II, FA50 1.4, DA10-17
To buy: Metz 58 AF-1, DA*50-135, DA12-24, DA100M
Posted 22/11/2009 - 20:03
Link
I use Lee filters, currently I only have a 0.3, 0.6 and a 0.9 ND grads (hard edge). One good thing is they are large enough to be able to use them as normal ND's which the soft edge probably wouldn't. The softs are next on my list to order.
Posted 29/11/2009 - 00:34
Link
What actual effect could I expect from a circular polariser?
Posted 29/11/2009 - 10:06
Link
This may help sophie
http://www.dslrtips.com/workshops/How_to_use_polarizing_filters/reduce_haze_deep...
http://www.dslrtips.com/workshops/How_to_use_polarizing_filters/reduce_haze_deep...
Posted 29/11/2009 - 13:23
Link
From the same site I always use, something about most if not all the photographic filters.
http://www.galitz.co.il/en/articles/filters.shtml
http://www.galitz.co.il/en/articles/filters.shtml
Posted 30/11/2009 - 18:40
Link
So the circularity is in the shape of the filter?
I read it as 'circular polariser', i.e. producing circularly polarised light. That can be achieved with quarter wave plates etc but it seemed not to fill the requirement of eliminating one particular plane of polarisation. The terminology seems to be a bit confusing. I have a rotating, circular shaped, polariser which, I guess is what 'they' mean nowadays.
Not being picky - just genuinely confused as I have a Physics background (not always an advantage).
I read it as 'circular polariser', i.e. producing circularly polarised light. That can be achieved with quarter wave plates etc but it seemed not to fill the requirement of eliminating one particular plane of polarisation. The terminology seems to be a bit confusing. I have a rotating, circular shaped, polariser which, I guess is what 'they' mean nowadays.
Not being picky - just genuinely confused as I have a Physics background (not always an advantage).
Posted 30/11/2009 - 18:45
Link
From luminous-landscapes site:
Circular Vs. Linear Polarizers
There are two types of polarizing filters available — linear or circular. Linear polarizers are more effective and less expensive than circular ones. But circular polarizers are needed with just about any camera that has a through-the-lens metering system, or autofocus.
The reason for this is that both of these systems use semi-silvered mirrors to siphon off some of the light coming though the lens. If that light is linearly polarized it renders either the metering or the autofocus ineffective. This means that you're going to have to buy circular polarizers unless you're shooting with a pre-1970's camera, or a view camera.
Circular Vs. Linear Polarizers
There are two types of polarizing filters available — linear or circular. Linear polarizers are more effective and less expensive than circular ones. But circular polarizers are needed with just about any camera that has a through-the-lens metering system, or autofocus.
The reason for this is that both of these systems use semi-silvered mirrors to siphon off some of the light coming though the lens. If that light is linearly polarized it renders either the metering or the autofocus ineffective. This means that you're going to have to buy circular polarizers unless you're shooting with a pre-1970's camera, or a view camera.
Posted 30/11/2009 - 19:13
Link
Funny enough though the Camera don't seem to suffer from Linear filters, maybe something of the early days of AF?
Posted 30/11/2009 - 19:26
Link
Anvh wrote:
Funny enough though the Camera don't seem to suffer from Linear filters, maybe something of the early days of AF?
Are you saying you've tried linear polarisers without any problem on your K10D?
Funny enough though the Camera don't seem to suffer from Linear filters, maybe something of the early days of AF?
Posted 30/11/2009 - 19:29
Link
No but members here have, don't ask for names though.
Posted 30/11/2009 - 20:05
Link
sophiecentaur wrote:
So the circularity is in the shape of the filter?
I read it as 'circular polariser', i.e. producing circularly polarised light. That can be achieved with quarter wave plates etc but it seemed not to fill the requirement of eliminating one particular plane of polarisation. The terminology seems to be a bit confusing. I have a rotating, circular shaped, polariser which, I guess is what 'they' mean nowadays.
Not being picky - just genuinely confused as I have a Physics background (not always an advantage).
I thought the same thing when I came back to photography and first heard of CPs so I did an experiment. I put a CP on top of a linear and rotated one relative to the other. they behaved exactly as two linears would, so I dismissed that theory.
So the circularity is in the shape of the filter?
I read it as 'circular polariser', i.e. producing circularly polarised light. That can be achieved with quarter wave plates etc but it seemed not to fill the requirement of eliminating one particular plane of polarisation. The terminology seems to be a bit confusing. I have a rotating, circular shaped, polariser which, I guess is what 'they' mean nowadays.
Not being picky - just genuinely confused as I have a Physics background (not always an advantage).
Posted 30/11/2009 - 20:27
Link
Here is some info link
I had found a better link once...
This might be it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_polarization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_polarization
I had found a better link once...
This might be it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_polarization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_polarization
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.



353 posts
16 years
Edinburgh
Just wondering what filter kits anyone is using for ND Grads?