Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Which Filters For Landscape Photography  (Read 4516 times)
Dan AU
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4



WWW
« on: March 09, 2009, 04:27:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I am new here and was hoping to get some answers on a landscape focussed site.

I have a Canon EOS 450D with the 17-55 IS Kit Lens. Live in Australia at a place called Lake Cathie.

Are you able to advise which filters or filter colours would be best used for landscape/seascape photography.

Thanks Dan

Logged

Constructive critique always welcome to assist in improving my photographs.

Camera: Canon EOS 450D
Lenses: EF-S18-55 IS | EF-S55-250 IS
Tripod: Sherpa 803R Ballhead
Software: Canon DPP, GIMP
Photos: [a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/eosdp" target="_blank"]http://www.flickr.com/photos/eosdp[/a]
situgrrl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 342


WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2009, 06:23:43 AM »
ReplyReply

A circular polariser is the only essential in this day and age - everything else can be done better in post.  ND filters are useful depending on your style.  A protection filter is sensible by the beach to protect your front element from salt spray - but will also degrade quality and decrease contrast.  I don't bother with them unless I know my camera is getting put through hell, other's never remove them.

The most important thing to know is that filter quality is at least as important as lens quality so don't cheap out!
Logged

Lust4Life
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 430


WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2009, 06:28:59 AM »
ReplyReply

I'd add that there are times when shooting in the mountains and other areas with a lot of UV, that a UV filter will enhance the clarity of the image.
Logged

mike.online
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 207


WWW
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2009, 11:44:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I have a UV on all of my lenses and never remove them. Glass it too expensive to risk scratching (IMO).

A circular polarizer is a must.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/polarizers.shtml
Logged

Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2009, 12:10:16 AM »
ReplyReply

For some lenses (like certain Canon L lenses) a filter is necessary to complete the weather sealing (FWIW).  And I tend to agree with the group that thinks it is easier to clean or replace a UV filter than the front element of a lens.

That said, the non-protection filter I use the most is a circular polarizer - mostly to cut glare and reflections rather than to make dramatic skies.

Neutral density filters come in handy to enable longer exposures or to control depth of field.

And I carry a set of graduated ND filters for those times when it is not practical to blend multiple exposures in post processing (mostly in images with moving subject matter).

Paul
« Last Edit: March 10, 2009, 08:54:21 AM by PaulS » Logged

wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5791



WWW
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2009, 12:19:19 AM »
ReplyReply

In today's digital age this is a tough question to answer, especially if you're starting out.  For us 'old folks' who have been using film for a long time, coloured filters and ND filters were sometimes used for special effects or to bring dynamic range under control in the case of graduated ND filters.  Gels were and are still used over lights.  Today one can achieve these effects using software, HDR processing, etc. but it's really up to the photographer.  There are those who prefer to 'do it all in post' and there are those who prefer to get as much of the shot 'in the can' as possible, and do final cleanups on the computer.  It depends on where you're most comfortable - behind the camera or in front of the computer.  Keep in mind that what isn't captured in the field is much harder to create later, so if you are planning to do a lot of post-processing, don't be stingy with your images while making photographs.  

Again, this is a holdover from film.  Someone used to shooting digital may make a thousand exposures a day.  Someone who measures exposures in terms of 36-exposure films might make a hundred or two, and someone working with 4x5 or larger film plates might make only a few exposures, or none.

Mike.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2009, 12:19:55 AM by wolfnowl » Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Dan AU
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4



WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2009, 02:33:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the replies, I will have a look at the filters you have mentioned. I was searching and reading this website while at work and came across this blog http://singhray.blogspot.com/ which seems to have a lot of the information I was looking for.

Logged

Constructive critique always welcome to assist in improving my photographs.

Camera: Canon EOS 450D
Lenses: EF-S18-55 IS | EF-S55-250 IS
Tripod: Sherpa 803R Ballhead
Software: Canon DPP, GIMP
Photos: [a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/eosdp" target="_blank"]http://www.flickr.com/photos/eosdp[/a]
ProPhotoInsights
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2009, 05:19:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I've not heard of those filters but I use Lee Filters made here in the Uk.
Not cheap but probably one of the best filter companies around.
Simon
Logged

www.ProPhotoInsights.Net
Digital Photography Tutorials
"Step Behind The Scenes On Pro Photo Shoots"

www.plantphoto.com
Mosccol
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 74


« Reply #8 on: April 07, 2009, 10:23:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Bear in mind the fact that digital cameras are not really subject to UV effects: if you have 'legacy' filters, by all means use them; otherwise a simple neutral filter will be best. You may want to read this.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad