Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32

Thread: Which is better for long exposure shot?

  1. #1

    Default Which is better for long exposure shot?

    As we know lens perform best between f4.0 to f8.0. However for long exposure, we need to shoot at f22 or use at least 3 stops ND filter. So my question is, which one produces better image quality as well as sharpness?
    D7100,SB910,17-50/2.8OS,105/2.8VR,85/1.8D,2xE-M1,O60/2.8,12-40/2.8,35-100/2.8,14-42,LX100

  2. #2
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    get good quality ND filters if you have money.

    no money, shoot f22
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  3. #3

    Default

    How to determine good quality? Those hoya can? Or must get b+w?
    D7100,SB910,17-50/2.8OS,105/2.8VR,85/1.8D,2xE-M1,O60/2.8,12-40/2.8,35-100/2.8,14-42,LX100

  4. #4
    Senior Member edutilos-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    The Universe
    Posts
    5,991

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    Quote Originally Posted by sin77 View Post
    How to determine good quality? Those hoya can? Or must get b+w?
    Hoya is fine, B+W is also fine. To my knowledge, Hoya makes ND400, which is about 8 or 9 stops (do the math yourself). B+W has ND106 (6 stops) and ND110 (10 stops). The two are comparable but not exactly the same. I think the price difference is not that great. I've used all 3 and they all have warming issues (natural, due to IR leakage. The less strong ND filters have a lesser problem, naturally) which are easily corrected if you shoot in RAW. These are all screw-in filters.

    There is also Lee Big Stopper, which you can consider if you are willing to fork out money for the whole filter system. The benefit of using a slot system is that you can stack ND and GND easily (assuming you buy the appropriate size). Also, you can pull out the filter holder easily for recomposing via viewfinder. With Live View these days, the screw-in system isn't that bad in comparison but when it gets dark Live View can only boost the image so much. By the way, the Lee Big Stopper cools down the image deliberately... Also correctable in post.

    I myself use ND106 and ND110 and blend different exposures in post-processing. Hope this helps.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    Quote Originally Posted by sin77 View Post
    As we know lens perform best between f4.0 to f8.0. However for long exposure, we need to shoot at f22 or use at least 3 stops ND filter. So my question is, which one produces better image quality as well as sharpness?
    I had ask myself the same questions. When I take into consideration of sharpness, vignetting and especially diffraction, I would use f/8 and a good ND filter.
    I would think ND filters affect longer focal length ( > 200mm ) as I had come across those images.

  6. #6
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,390

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    Quote Originally Posted by sin77 View Post
    As we know lens perform best between f4.0 to f8.0. However for long exposure, we need to shoot at f22 or use at least 3 stops ND filter. So my question is, which one produces better image quality as well as sharpness?
    Shooting at f/22 on crop will cause blur images due to diffraction on the small aperture. For crop, use f/16 at most.
    EOS

  7. #7

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    I was thinking f8 only. So it seems I should get 3 stops nd. Hope it's enough. Otherwise hard to compose.
    D7100,SB910,17-50/2.8OS,105/2.8VR,85/1.8D,2xE-M1,O60/2.8,12-40/2.8,35-100/2.8,14-42,LX100

  8. #8

    Default

    Is there like an ideal duration for LE shots? Of course diff situations will require diff settings, but is there a general guideline for a typical LE scene, like night sceneries with or without city lights, smoothing out river flow, getting those dramatic clouds etc... not interested in super long LE like star trail etc... given iso 100 and f8-11, what would b a gd shutter speed to experiment with for decent exposure, which may equate to what kinda ND I should get...
    hi

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silvermoon1407
    Is there like an ideal duration for LE shots? Of course diff situations will require diff settings, but is there a general guideline for a typical LE scene, like night sceneries with or without city lights, smoothing out river flow, getting those dramatic clouds etc... not interested in super long LE like star trail etc... given iso 100 and f8-11, what would b a gd shutter speed to experiment with for decent exposure, which may equate to what kinda ND I should get...
    I have tried LE from 1sec to more than 10 minutes. For smoothing water surface, my most common duration are between 30sec to 3min. Probably having a 3, 6 and 9 (or 10) stop ND filter will cover most of your needs.
    Coolthought - 冷静思考 - クールだ http://xaa.xanga.com/0aba0666d143253.../t35917343.gif

  10. #10
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    the length of exposure time is depends on the movement of the water, ambient light and effects you want,
    so you don't just get one piece of ND filter if you only want to shoot at certain f-stop.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  11. #11

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    I would suggest running a test to see how bad the soften due to defraction is at F22, F16, & F8. Why ? each lens has a different behavior pattern it is not the same for all example a 24, 50, 85, 105 or 180 will not return identical results. Use the lens you plan to work with understand it's quirks. Yah it is good to look at images for a magnification point other than 200% or 100% try print size try 50% more than print size.

  12. #12
    Member Kenneth67C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Shanghai, China, China
    Posts
    1,087

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    Depends on the lens: TSE17mm@f22, 30s, iso200.
    An artist who realizes there is a supreme force and works gladly as an apprentice under heaven.

  13. #13
    Senior Member edutilos-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    The Universe
    Posts
    5,991

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    Quote Originally Posted by ellery View Post
    I would suggest running a test to see how bad the soften due to defraction is at F22, F16, & F8. Why ? each lens has a different behavior pattern it is not the same for all example a 24, 50, 85, 105 or 180 will not return identical results. Use the lens you plan to work with understand it's quirks. Yah it is good to look at images for a magnification point other than 200% or 100% try print size try 50% more than print size.
    Yes, that's true. Also differenet people have different expectations of sharpness.

    I for one, care less about sharpness, more about the effect. I'm sure as hell not going to care about diffraction if I can't get the length of exposure I want. If it's too short, it's too short. I'd rather stop down than overexpose.

    Of course, for Pentax DSLRs there is multi-exposure function which helps with overcoming this, but there are also limitations to that too.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    East
    Posts
    5,157

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    Quote Originally Posted by sin77 View Post
    As we know lens perform best between f4.0 to f8.0. However for long exposure, we need to shoot at f22 or use at least 3 stops ND filter. So my question is, which one produces better image quality as well as sharpness?
    Quote Originally Posted by sin77 View Post
    How to determine good quality? Those hoya can? Or must get b+w?
    Quote Originally Posted by sin77 View Post
    I was thinking f8 only. So it seems I should get 3 stops nd. Hope it's enough. Otherwise hard to compose.
    Stacking filters may affect IQ, but if you see all the examples in the Landscape sub-forums, from edutilos, scint, shiosaki, wonglp, as an indication if it really affects the IQ that much. I really think it's minimal if it's just 1 ND filter, esp. if you are just sharing on the pictures on the web.

    Drop-in filter systems are quite expensive, especially Lee, but they do offer the convenience of taking the drop in filters out, and recomposing shots. But for me, screw in filters, typically cheaper, will work. It's sometimes just a tweak of your process of taking a shot will be sufficient. Just mount on tripod, compose properly first, then screw the ND filter in. Don't be in such a hurry to screw them in. ;-)

  15. #15
    Senior Member edutilos-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    The Universe
    Posts
    5,991

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    Quote Originally Posted by hjbyeo View Post

    Drop-in filter systems are quite expensive, especially Lee, but they do offer the convenience of taking the drop in filters out, and recomposing shots. But for me, screw in filters, typically cheaper, will work. It's sometimes just a tweak of your process of taking a shot will be sufficient. Just mount on tripod, compose properly first, then screw the ND filter in. Don't be in such a hurry to screw them in. ;-)
    The more modern implementations of Live View also usually allow one to compose even with screw-in filter on... Until it gets too dark anyways.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    East
    Posts
    5,157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edutilos-
    The more modern implementations of Live View also usually allow one to compose even with screw-in filter on... Until it gets too dark anyways.
    That's how I use the K-01!

  17. #17

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    Best to get the necessary filters and I dont remember the screw-in ones (even if it is B+W ND110) will cost you a bomb. A screw-in filter, a tripod, a pair of steady hands and practice are all you need for long exposure shots.
    D200

  18. #18

    Default Re: Which is better for long exposure shot?

    hmm, i was wondering will i get different images if i shoot with my f/32 vs a 10stop on f22?
    anyone has any views to share? thks.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bluecrayfish View Post
    hmm, i was wondering will i get different images if i shoot with my f/32 vs a 10stop on f22?
    anyone has any views to share? thks.
    Yes. Very different. U get a difference of 9 stops...
    hi

  20. #20
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bluecrayfish View Post
    hmm, i was wondering will i get different images if i shoot with my f/32 vs a 10stop on f22?
    anyone has any views to share? thks.
    From f22 to f32, is 1 stop defferent.
    If you add a 10stop ND filter, you need extend the exposure time by 9 stops.

    The results largely depend on what you are shooting.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •