Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 110

Thread: Regarding filters

  1. #21

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    i frequently stack ND 110 with GND.
    Hi, nite86mare, a newb question here. may i knw wat is nd 110? i'm using a nd4 filter. in wat way is it different from nd 110? thanks
    S5Pro, Nikon 70-210 f4,Tamron 17-50mm f2.8

  2. #22

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by justin79 View Post
    Hi, nite86mare, a newb question here. may i knw wat is nd 110? i'm using a nd4 filter. in wat way is it different from nd 110? thanks
    they are same in the sense that both are nd filters

    purpose is the same, extend exposure

    nd110 is way stronger than nd 4, nd4 reduces light in a way that you need 2 stops more exposure. nd110 needs 10 stops more.

    nd4 is more useful for lower light situations, where the exposure timing is long but not long enough to blur water, for example. example is iso100, f/8, 15 seconds, you extend it to 60 seconds.

    nd110 is more useful for daytime situations, where exposure timing is short, and you need to extend the exposure by much more. for example, if your original optimal exposure without filter is iso100, f/22, 1/16 seconds, then nd filter will extend it to be about 60 seconds.

    hope this helps.

  3. #23
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by kriegsketten View Post
    No nos - I may sound crazy at times, but I ain't that nutty! So, warning accepted!

    Glass huh? Hmmmm....

    Cheap cheap only la. 200+ USD a piece...

  4. #24

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    do note that also:

    1) stronger nd filters might introduce color shifts, this is due to ir leakage, or something like that. so best to shoot in raw, or you will get over warm pictures.

    2) when using stronger nd filters, due to the nature of light being stronger (although is good practice during any long exposure to cover the VF with the VF cover supplied with your camera, or if you have to buy, buy it) during such timings, best to ensure that your VF is covered somehow. maybe with cloth if no choice. less likely to happen with weaker nd filters.

    problem discussed here:
    http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=547238

    resolution provided in a later thread with some tests i ran, but i can't remember the thread name, so you will have to look for it yourself.

  5. #25
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    they are same in the sense that both are nd filters

    purpose is the same, extend exposure

    nd110 is way stronger than nd 4, nd4 reduces light in a way that you need 2 stops more exposure. nd110 needs 10 stops more.

    nd4 is more useful for lower light situations, where the exposure timing is long but not long enough to blur water, for example. example is iso100, f/8, 15 seconds, you extend it to 60 seconds.

    nd110 is more useful for daytime situations, where exposure timing is short, and you need to extend the exposure by much more. for example, if your original optimal exposure without filter is iso100, f/22, 1/16 seconds, then nd filter will extend it to be about 60 seconds.

    hope this helps.
    Actually the easy way to calculate is to multiply the exposure by 1000. It is not exactly 10 stops. 10 stops is x1024.

  6. #26
    New Member kriegsketten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Southern Enclave
    Posts
    2,560

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    Cheap cheap only la. 200+ USD a piece...
    Making crucifix sign with my slippers... Dun wan! I prefer Nikon 35mm f/1.8! Oooops! Another poison....
    Myflickr | Zoom in for the KILL!

  7. #27

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    Actually the easy way to calculate is to multiply the exposure by 1000. It is not exactly 10 stops. 10 stops is x1024.
    yes, but at such large long exposures, it hardly matters.

  8. #28
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    yes, but at such large long exposures, it hardly matters.
    True. I just felt that x1000 is easier to calculate than x1024.

  9. #29

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    True. I just felt that x1000 is easier to calculate than x1024.

    that's true, but you can end up with pretty funky numbers.

    spinning the wheel dial until 30 seconds, and then multiplying by 2 beyond 30 seconds works for me for now :P

  10. #30

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    hello, does you guys know any webby where i can read up on filters.
    cos if i getting filters, i actually do not know which type to get, what are the different filters, brands all these.

  11. #31

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by niunai View Post
    hello, does you guys know any webby where i can read up on filters.
    cos if i getting filters, i actually do not know which type to get, what are the different filters, brands all these.
    very long time never use this


  12. #32

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    hahaha!!! ok google is always your best friend..

  13. #33

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    I have done some reading on filters.

    I am currently using nikon d90 kit lens.
    If i am not wrong, it is 67mm thread. So there is a need to use a step up adaptor ring right?

    And from so many brans, Lee, cokin and hitech. If i am on budget, i should go for cokin?
    Another concern is, which series should i go for the filter holder?
    A series- 67mm, P-84mm, X-130mm, or Z-100mm? Should i take into consideration what are the lens i will be getting in future to choose the correct series?

  14. #34

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    I have done some reading on filters.

    I am currently using nikon d90 kit lens.
    If i am not wrong, it is 67mm thread. So there is a need to use a step up adaptor ring right?

    And from so many brans, Lee, cokin and hitech. If i am on budget, i should go for cokin?
    Another concern is, which series should i go for the filter holder?
    A series- 67mm, P-84mm, X-130mm, or Z-100mm? Should i take into consideration what are the lens i will be getting in future to choose the correct series?

  15. #35
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Bedok
    Posts
    3,268

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by niunai View Post
    I have done some reading on filters.

    I am currently using nikon d90 kit lens.
    If i am not wrong, it is 67mm thread. So there is a need to use a step up adaptor ring right?
    Only if you are getting for e.g. the 77mm filter. Most of us prefer to get one size filter (the largest amongst our lenses) so that can use across all the lenses, then use the step-up ring to convert those not 77mm to be 77mm, as filters are generally more expensive than those step-up rings.

    I do that for my 18-105mm also; thus sharing one set of filters across the board. However if you don't foresee yourself getting any 77mm filter thread lens, then you might find it easier and cheaper to get 67mm filters.

  16. #36
    New Member kriegsketten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Southern Enclave
    Posts
    2,560

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    Only if you are getting for e.g. the 77mm filter. Most of us prefer to get one size filter (the largest amongst our lenses) so that can use across all the lenses, then use the step-up ring to convert those not 77mm to be 77mm, as filters are generally more expensive than those step-up rings.

    I do that for my 18-105mm also; thus sharing one set of filters across the board. However if you don't foresee yourself getting any 77mm filter thread lens, then you might find it easier and cheaper to get 67mm filters.
    Yeah, agree with what Wildcat says, get smaller if you don't need 77mm... But if you have inclination to invest in UWA lenses in the future (for landscapes/architecture purposes)... 77mm is the usual thread size for most lenses out there... Strictly FYI, up you entirely on what size to choose. 77mm is also common for popular zoom/super-zooms (those in the fast aperture cat.) as well...
    Last edited by kriegsketten; 6th August 2010 at 11:41 AM.
    Myflickr | Zoom in for the KILL!

  17. #37

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    Landscape photographers do stack filters at times, when the desired effect requires it. We very seldom stack a CPL with a GND. We mostly stack ND with GND. Personally, I will avoid stacking more than 2 filters.

    Bro, what is the concern here if we stack a CPL with a GND ? I had stacked a CPL, GND and ND and quite like the cast.. But of course, there was some minor flaring...

  18. #38

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Much appreciated for all ur info.
    So to summarize things up, which series of filter i should choose is solely depends on myself. If i dont plan to get UWA lens. Then i should just stick to svller size filter. However, 77mm is common among zoom and UWA lens, so its better to get 77mm if i plan to purchase these lens?
    Just a last question, the brand cokin is substantial right? Can any landscape or architect photographer give me a confirmation? Cos i think LEE is expensive.

  19. #39
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by stonefish35 View Post
    Bro, what is the concern here if we stack a CPL with a GND ? I had stacked a CPL, GND and ND and quite like the cast.. But of course, there was some minor flaring...
    This is because for most of us, we only use CPL to get a bluer sky. we also use GND to darken the sky. So instead of stacking CPL and GND, we might as well use a stronger GND to do the same thing.

    Also, we like to shoot sunrises and sunsets. CPL works best it is 90deg from the sun rays. With sunrise and sunset, CPL's effect is reduced when shooting in the direction of the sun.

  20. #40
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Regarding filters

    Quote Originally Posted by niunai View Post
    Much appreciated for all ur info.
    So to summarize things up, which series of filter i should choose is solely depends on myself. If i dont plan to get UWA lens. Then i should just stick to svller size filter. However, 77mm is common among zoom and UWA lens, so its better to get 77mm if i plan to purchase these lens?
    Just a last question, the brand cokin is substantial right? Can any landscape or architect photographer give me a confirmation? Cos i think LEE is expensive.
    LEE is considered one of the top for filters.

    If you want to save money, i would say get the P holder from Cokin, but use the cheap filters from Tianya. So when you finally move up to something better in the future, you will not lose that much money.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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
  •