You don't publish your apertures. ND filter = wider aperture. Wider aperture (if you're wide open)=softer focus. There are very few lenses that are as sharp wide open as they are stopped down.
However, if you first shot was at f16 and your second shot was f8, the filter's to blame.
Meant "didn't publish your apertures" - early in the morning...
GDRoth
Loc: Southeast Michigan USA
did you by chance have another filter (like UV) on the lens at the same time?
KG wrote:
Last night, I decided to try using neutral density filters on sunny days when using fill flash.
The idea is that by using an ND filter I would be able to open up aperture and take pictures with shallower DOF without having to use high speed sync (and waste flash power).
I did some reading to confirm my thoughts , and decided that I really need to get myself a 3-stop filter. No need for variable density. 3 stops would be just what I need according to my metering of a typical situation in which I would be using it. I decided to settle on a filter from B+W.
Unfortunately, we are traveling around in Italy right now. Well, that's not the unfortunate part. The unfortunate part happens to be the fact that I got the urge to buy an ND filter at a time when we were staying in a small town with only one (smallish) photography/video store.
They only had two filters in stock. One was a 6-stop B+W, and the other one was a 2-stop Marumi.
6 stops is way too much for me. So I decided to get the one made by Marumi.
Although I never heard about that brand before, the "Made in Japan" sign (along with the fact that there wasn't any alternative at the moment) encouraged me to get it.
Here is the result of a little test. Both shots were taken with a Canon 17-55 (with a hood) on a 7D on a tripod with a remote shutter. Bright daylight with a fill flash (CTO gel).
The shots are a bit overexposed. No post processing. Straight-from-camera JPG.
Sadly, I only got a chance to look at the pics on a larger screen later in the day. We are in another town now. Too far away to drive back just to return the filter.
The first shot was taken without a filter. The second one is with Marumi ND4X.
I guess that's what happens when you stick a $60-piece of glass in front of an $1100-piece of glass.
Last night, I decided to try using neutral density... (
show quote)
About the only difference I see is that the tones are a little warmer with the filter which to my eye is not such a bad thing.
You could have gotten the same effect post processing if you wanted to.
You bought the ND filter to narrow the depth of field yet the biggest change I see is the blue fringe on your hat. Had the background been decidedly fuzzed out I'd be happy, but it isn't so I wouldn't waste my time with the extra glass and it's blue add on.
mdeman wrote:
what were the apertures for the two pictures?
It was f/5.6 without a filter and f/2.8 with the filter. Same shutter speed.
I thought about it too. But 17-55 is a decent lens. While all lenses are softer at wider apertures, I don't think
blue CA would be the result of a fault of the lens. Green/orange maybe, but not blue.
I'm going to run some more tests for f/2.8 vs. f/.5.6 with and without this filter.
But as far as I remember from past shots, 17-55 was always great for me even wide open.
bkyser wrote:
Are you sure it isn't reflected light.
On contrary, I'm sure it is. This filter has coating on the outside, but not on the inside. It's most likely light bouncing off of some lens element onto the filter and from the filter back through the lens onto the sensor.
GDRoth wrote:
did you by chance have another filter (like UV) on the lens at the same time?
Nope. I stopped using UV filters some time ago.
wrobart wrote:
You bought the ND filter to narrow the depth of field yet the biggest change I see is the blue fringe on your hat.
Yes. Ideally, I want to be able to use ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/250 on a sunny day.
What I get instead is blue cast on all overexposed/bright surfaces.
The Chromatic Aberration is also a sign of a wide open lens. Most modern glass gets rid of CA in mid-range stops.
Lens hood on or off with both shots?
KG wrote:
mdeman wrote:
what were the apertures for the two pictures?
It was f/5.6 without a filter and f/2.8 with the filter. Same shutter speed.
I thought about it too. But 17-55 is a decent lens. While all lenses are softer at wider apertures, I don't think
blue CA would be the result of a fault of the lens. Green/orange maybe, but not blue.
I'm going to run some more tests for f/2.8 vs. f/.5.6 with and without this filter.
But as far as I remember from past shots, 17-55 was always great for me even wide open.
bkyser wrote:
Are you sure it isn't reflected light.
On contrary, I'm sure it is. This filter has coating on the outside, but not on the inside. It's most likely light bouncing off of some lens element onto the filter and from the filter back through the lens onto the sensor.
GDRoth wrote:
did you by chance have another filter (like UV) on the lens at the same time?
Nope. I stopped using UV filters some time ago.
wrobart wrote:
You bought the ND filter to narrow the depth of field yet the biggest change I see is the blue fringe on your hat.
Yes. Ideally, I want to be able to use ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/250 on a sunny day.
What I get instead is blue cast on all overexposed/bright surfaces.
quote=mdeman what were the apertures for the two ... (
show quote)
Why do you have specific settings that you want to use on a sunny Day? Do you compare what your metering system wants to do to your ideal settings?
Two things:
1. I am confused by your labling of ND's in terms of stops. The usual labling of ND filter is: 2 & .3 = 1 stop; 4 & .6 = 2 stops; and 8 & .9 = 3 stops. There are 8 and 10 stop ND filters and you pay a lot for them.
2. Instead of going directing to ND's, did you consider using a circular polarizing filter? A CPL helps eliminate bad light and flares then increases color saturation a little.
Well at least we aren't BS'ing about post processing! To paraphrase the Bard, William, Methinks he protests too loudly! Last thing I'd be doing, touring Italy and looking at all the "Naked Davids" is bitch about similar looking pictures! WE Texans have a saying--he'd complain, even, if they wree hanging him with a new rope!
PIXChuck wrote:
Well at least we aren't BS'ing about post processing! To paraphrase the Bard, William, Methinks he protests too loudly! Last thing I'd be doing, touring Italy and looking at all the "Naked Davids" is bitch about similar looking pictures! WE Texans have a saying--he'd complain, even, if they wree hanging him with a new rope new rope!
You need to read your posts before hitting "send". :lol: I got the point though. The problem is the ropes aren't being used. Oh crap! I've started more trouble! :roll: :thumbup:
[quote=pounder35]
PIXChuck wrote:
Well at least we aren't BS'ing about post processing! To paraphrase the Bard, William, Methinks he protests too loudly! Last thing I'd be doing, touring Italy and looking at all the "Naked Davids" is bitch about similar looking pictures! WE Texans have a saying--he'd complain, even, if they wree hanging him with a new rope
You need to read your posts before hitting "send". :lol: I got the point though. The problem is the ropes aren't being used. Oh crap! I've started more trouble! :roll: :thumbup:
Well at least we aren't BS'ing about post processi... (
show quote)
>>>There, is that better! Some folks just need to bitch---keeps the juices flowing. Hey pounder, are my 76 year old eyes beginning to need help? Damned if I saw much of anything wrong with the guy's product!......C
CAM1017 wrote:
Why do you have specific settings that you want to use on a sunny Day? Do you compare what your metering system wants to do to your ideal settings?
To get a certain effect; in this case; shallow depth of field.
On a sunny day it's so bright even at ISO 100 that if I were to set my camera to f/2.8 I'd be hard pressed to get a usable shutter speed....it would exceed my 1/8000 camera limit.
saycheese
Loc: By the Big Lake in West Michigan
...on the other hand, you are in ITALY taking pictures with a crappy filter. Italy. It could be much, much worse.Enjoy yourself and fix the pics in pp.
Keep smiling!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.