In aeroplane shooting clouds and landscape, which lens?

[dRebelXT]

I can lay my hands on either EF 28-135mm IS OR EF 17-40mm L. When I travel to
Phuket, which lens give me a better view in the sky? Assume I get a window
seat. ;p

 

[Snoweagle]

I can lay my hands on either EF 28-135mm IS OR EF 17-40mm L. When I travel to
Phuket, which lens give me a better view in the sky? Assume I get a window
seat. ;p

Definitely the 17-40 as it's wider. Don't forget to add a polarising filter too.

 

[dRebelXT]

Definitely the 17-40 as it's wider. Don't forget to add a polarising filter too.

Thank you. My 77mm set of filters should have arrived by then.
Does a blue grad ND filter help get bluer skies?

 

[dRebelXT]

Another question,

For a 4 day trip to Phuket, what are the curisiosities shall I shoot?
My 17-40mm will take care of landscape and seashores.
I can take another lens also.

Do they have large varieties of insects and birds which can not be found in Singapore?

 

[Snoweagle]

Thank you. My 77mm set of filters should have arrived by then.
Does a blue grad ND filter help get bluer skies?

Yupz but the rest of yr pics will turn blue too. A polariser is the ideal one.

 

[Snoweagle]

Another question,

For a 4 day trip to Phuket, what are the curisiosities shall I shoot?
My 17-40mm will take care of landscape and seashores.
I can take another lens also.

Do they have large varieties of insects and birds which can not be found in Singapore?

I've not been to Phuket so i'm not sure. But if i were you, i'd carry light. Maybe a walkaround lens or a wide to tele zoom will be good.

 

[dRebelXT]

I've not been to Phuket so i'm not sure. But if i were you, i'd carry light. Maybe a walkaround lens or a wide to tele zoom will be good.

How I wish Canon makes EF18-200 IS F/2.8L USM (Macro 1:1) within 800grams within $1k. ;p

 

[Snoweagle]

How I wish Canon makes EF18-200 IS F/2.8L USM (Macro 1:1) within 800grams within $1k. ;p

Making this lens is possible since Tamron and Nikon have done it, but not the constant aperture range though as adding IS, it'll definitely cost over 1K.

 

[aloyteo]

bring a polariser, but dun use it to shoot through aircraft windows cos there will be weird colours as shown @ http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~zhuxj/astro/html/polarizedwindow.html

 

[Terence]

No need to use polariser, shoot with sun on your back else you going to get lots of window relections. The following examples were shot either early in the day or just at sunset.

Image 1
Image 2
Image 3

 

[Snoweagle]

But better to bring, just in case.

 

[yukazunori]

I can lay my hands on either EF 28-135mm IS OR EF 17-40mm L. When I travel to
Phuket, which lens give me a better view in the sky? Assume I get a window
seat. ;p

i flew to san francisco last year, since it was my first trip of out singapore so was extremely excited yet sorta ill prepared to shoot on the plane *i'm a country bumpkin* lol i was using a EF 28-135 IS and also a 135mm prime from a fren i think, turnout was quite good, though actually u dun need that much wide angle... cuz one limitator.... THE WINDOW... its bloody small even if u stick it in front of yr filter... lol hahaha but seriously it was one hell of an experience for me, and even managed to capture the northern lights! haha that one i only saw when i downloaded it.. haha but yea great experience =)

hope my first time experience can help lol

 

[ywh]

Agree with Terence. The skies at higher altitudes are blue enough that a polarizer is not needed. It will give weird colours as the windows are birefringent.

Snoweagle,

No offence here, but I do realise you do give inaccurate advice at times. Confirm your research before posting will do you and the receiver much good.

 

[Snoweagle]

Agree with Terence. The skies at higher altitudes are blue enough that a polarizer is not needed. It will give weird colours as the windows are birefringent.

Snoweagle,

No offence here, but I do realise you do give inaccurate advice at times. Confirm your research before posting will do you and the receiver much good.

FYI it ain't inaccurate. Though i've not tried taking pics out of a plane's window with a CPL but it's best to have it. I didn't say it's a MUST to put the polariser so no offence to....don't jump to conclusions, it's not healthy too.

 

[ywh]

No problem, but what is your reason for using a polarizer at higher altitudes and when shooting through plexiglass?

Your statement of "the rest of your pics will be blue too" when using a blue grad filter is totally out.

 

[Snoweagle]

I dun get your idea but your statement of "the rest of your pics will be blue too" when using a blue grad filter is totally out.

Okok...maybe i didn't explain clearly. What i mean is of cos not the entire pic will turn blue cos if it's graduated colour. I have used ND grads before and didn't like the final outcome. Polarisers can do better IMO.

Here's an exerpt from the net to explain in detail what i mean:

"The position of the gradation over the lens can give a false impression. The percentage of shading over the front element does not necessarily equate to your slide. At f22 on certain lenses an apparent one-third gradation may not show at all on the final image. Only the part of the filter in line with the image coming through the diaphragm opening counts. Original designers of screw-in grads gave them a 50-50 split so they would work to some degree with any focal length or aperture.

A further complication is that when you hold these filters up they appear to be split at the light end of the gradation, but the edge you see on your film is near the dark end. What looks like a 50-50 split in the hand could be a 40-60 or even 35-65 split on your slide. This has dire consequences where the gradation is intended to hold down a bright background above your subject. If the edge ends above where you thought you put it, you'll have an unnaturally bright band that draws attention away from the intended subject."

Hope this explains.

 

[+evenstar]

I can lay my hands on either EF 28-135mm IS OR EF 17-40mm L. When I travel to
Phuket, which lens give me a better view in the sky? Assume I get a window
seat. ;p

17-40 will be too wide. I've tried shooting with a 24-70 on a 1.3x crop camera and could already see the window frame at 24mm

 

[ywh]

Okok...maybe i didn't explain clearly. What i mean is of cos not the entire pic will turn blue cos if it's graduated colour. I have used ND grads before and didn't like the final outcome. Polarisers can do better IMO.

Here's an exerpt from the net to explain in detail what i mean:

"The position of the gradation over the lens can give a false impression. The percentage of shading over the front element does not necessarily equate to your slide. At f22 on certain lenses an apparent one-third gradation may not show at all on the final image. Only the part of the filter in line with the image coming through the diaphragm opening counts. Original designers of screw-in grads gave them a 50-50 split so they would work to some degree with any focal length or aperture.

A further complication is that when you hold these filters up they appear to be split at the light end of the gradation, but the edge you see on your film is near the dark end. What looks like a 50-50 split in the hand could be a 40-60 or even 35-65 split on your slide. This has dire consequences where the gradation is intended to hold down a bright background above your subject. If the edge ends above where you thought you put it, you'll have an unnaturally bright band that draws attention away from the intended subject."

Hope this explains.

Thus it is important to know where exactly to place your grads. The use of the DOF preview will aid in this. Many pros that I know personally know have used ND grads with much success. Even with digital, many still stick by it with the Singh-Rays as the norm followed by Lee and Hitech. The polarizer and ND/coloured grads serve different purposes.

An advice to the threadstarter, use a black or dark coloured jacket to cut out reflections esp those from the overhead lights.

 

[Snoweagle]

Thus it is important to know where exactly to place your grads. The use of the DOF preview will aid in this. Many pros that I know personally know have used ND grads with much success. Even with digital, many still stick by it with the Singh-Rays as the norm followed by Lee and Hitech. The polarizer and ND/coloured grads serve different purposes.

An advice to the threadstarter, use a black or dark coloured jacket to cut out reflections esp those from the overhead lights.

The problem with me is that i seldom use the DOF preview button. Though i know it's useful for letting one preview the actual DOF by stopping down the the aperture that is selected, but i just left that out.

 

[ywh]

The problem with me is that i seldom use the DOF preview button. Though i know it's useful for letting one preview the actual DOF by stopping down the the aperture that is selected, but i just left that out.

Hmm...looks like you did not get my point.

"Then while the preview control holds the lens aperture in the close-down position, move the ND Grad up or down to position the ND graduation effect where you want it (you may need to turn your filter holder slightly to match your horizon line, too). As you move the filter, the graduation will become much more apparent." (From Singh-Ray's site).

Simply put, the DOF preview is to allow a more accurate placement of your grads and not the usual use of previewing the DOF...