This the effect of the POL


You see that the sky on the left is dark then on the right and the wider you lens is the more stronger that effect would be.

These are GND filters and the effect they give.


Since you darken the light of the sky, it's closer to the light of the ground. You can therefor better balance the both without one being to dark or to bright.

Yes sorry you said ND grad... I've the same filters that you've then
Cokin have a coloured POL and i'm quite curious to try that one out sometimes.


When you use an higher F/number the hole in the lens gets smaller so letting less light through. You increase exposure time with that but the other effect is that you depth of field gets very big. With landscape shots that's not really a problem I believe and to buy a cokin system just for the ND isn't worth it in my eyes.
Simply get one ND8 screw-in with stepdown rings and you're done for £70.
It's easier to fit in the bag and I believe that the quality of the filter is better.

Also like you said about post production, how many time will you photograph a waterfall? and is it worth spending money on that?

Although getting a Cokin GND set would be a good option. That's great to use for landscapes and buy a ND4 and/only a ND8 separate for it.
That's the way I should do it and not get the ND set

I believe that ND8 is strong enough or even a tiny bit too strong but you can use iso200 and you're fine then.

Sorry Hefty the Z-pro use better quality filters out from the Pro range, the Z-pro and X-pro use the same glass but difference size.
With the P filter you get more colour cast and the likes.

ND filters are there to increase the shutterspeed but somethimes you can easily use an higher f/number to bring up shutterspeed or else a single screw-in ND4 filter will help you enough.
Another option with waterfalls is to make several shots and merge them together, the water will be blurred aswell then... at least I think that will work

I'll go to the shop tomorrow since they have called me, I might finally have my kasemann CPL now *sighs* they needed to special order that.

@Hefty were do you use our ND for, I only used my twice... so to behonest a waste of money in my case
I do use GND for landscapes and such.

The 17-70 + 50-135 is a wonderfull combination.
What wider lens do you use now, if ti is the 16-45 then i would get the 50-135 instead of the 17-70. The 17-70 is an improvement over he 16-45 bu the extra reac the 50-135 brings in is more dear to me atleast then.

50mm is wide enough if people are your subject, the 50-135 is a wonderfull portrait lens. You will miss the landscape and architect shots with the lens, you can still do them though but it's harder.

If you really just want one lens or switch between subjects very often then the range of the 17-70 is more convenient. It's a real walk around lens.

I'm mostly saying things what Gwyn already have said

If the platters are still alright they can get the info off of that.

You're saying Morris dancers, I don't find a bit of blur movement a problem with that. You can even go to extremes with that. they surely shouldn't be pin-sharp, it will kill all movement. At least that's my view on the matter.

The 28mm 2.8 isn't expensive secondhand so you can give that a try and also get a flash. It's best in your case to have one with some creative options like trailcurtain and maybe even strobe. If I need to chose it would be the flash... atleast if you can use inderect flash... My experience with direct isn't so great, it will kill depth so you might need some accessories to help in that. Kris also say it's unflattering.

where do you read that?

I only saw this:
6. Digital cameras

You’ve probably heard many photographers complaining that if they had an SLR camera they could reach much more impressive DOFs. Why is it that a compact digital camera can’t reach the same DOF of a professional camera? The answer lies in the size of the sensor. If regular film cameras are in a 35 mm format and the professional digital cameras come close and sometimes even match them, then in the compact digital cameras the size of the sensor is barely the size of the nail on you pinky. This is the reason compact digital cameras use shorter focus lengths to reach the matching focus length of a 35 mm camera and this is why they can only reach much less impressive DOF and why the lens apertures are different, and an aperture of F/8 usually suffices, while in the SLR camera you need an aperture of F/22 to reach the same size DOF.

He is right though... it just depends on how you read what he means with impressive but in the end it comes clear that he means with impressive a small DOF

I got my Z-PRO set (holder gnd2, gnd4, gnd8 ) for €60... i might ask them if they ship to the uk.

GND filters are great for landscapes. most of the time, you're sky is to bright on photos and with a GND filter you darken only the sky.
I use GND filters a lot when doing landscapes. That's why I bought a cokin since with screw in filters you don't have the ability to change the horizon. That's also the only way I use Cokin.
I would purely get a cokin GND just for the 12-24 since that's a very nice landscape lens.

If you just want to use ND simply by screw-in they aren't expensive.
I've one ND4 but hardly ever used it.

About just a screw-in POL for the 17-70.
A POL filter i just a very nice filter to have on your lens almost all of the time, that's why I only buy high quality, they hard come off of it.
POL increase saturation and makes the sky bluer because it removes the haze.
I just don't find it handy to have the cokin holder on my lens all the time, a screw-in filter is no problem.

Why do you want to have ND btw, what do you hope you want to archive with them? sometimes there are tricks so that you don't need an ND.

srs has caps too

Yeah I had the mechanically one in my mind

Have you already seen the Ephotozone review of the K7?
I really like what I see with the ISO test
ISO1600 is no problem at all and even ISO3200 is usefull.
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Pentax-K7-11613