Keith S Loc: Federal Way, Wa

Hi HOG members,
I am once again in search of expert guidance.

I am progressing in my quest to strengthen my landscape images and could use some guidance on filters for the sky.

Do I use a grad ND or polarizer filter to deepen the blue in the sky?

As always thank you for your input.

Keith

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Polarizer. ND filters just reduce incoming light like using sun glasses.

CO

Use a polarizing filter. Try not to use it with wide angle lenses. You'll often get uneven polarization across the sky. I don't use them with lenses wider than 50mm.

Keith S Loc: Federal Way, Wa

Retired CPO,

Thank you. Off to buy a CPL.

Keith S Loc: Federal Way, Wa

Retired CPO,

Thank you. Off to buy a CPL.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

I use older vintage "film" lenses often. They seem to have far more contrast and color saturation than most modern "digital" lens. And with out the uneven sky CPLs usually give!

Yes, Graduated ND filters can be useful for landscapes, but for controlling high dynamic range, between sky, background, and foreground.

Keith S Loc: Federal Way, Wa

CO, I use my 18-135 canon lens at this time at about 35mm for my landscape shots. Seems to be the sweetest spot on my setup.

BassmanBruce Loc: Middle of the Mitten

Whoa Keith, not so fast!
Before you do, make note of the largest lens diameter thread you intend to get and buy this. Then get step up rings so it will fit all your lenses.
Have fun, I love using a polarizer.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I had a problem with a zoom set to 18....
35 seems to be acceptable. You need to try it for your lens.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

As far as I can remember, the uneven skies from using polarizers with wide lenses happened back in the film days also. I don't think there is a quality a lens has that would prevent that from happening. It's related to the angle of the sun, which changes more across a wide view.

Bipod

A UV filter (on lenses that transmit UV) will reduce haze. Sometimes that is all you need.

A GND filter requires a fairly flat horizon. It must be slid up and down in a holder in order
to line up the horizon with the transistion in the filer. Screw-on ones are useless.

GNDs come in several grades and either smooth transition or sharp transition. The latter
are mainly useful for seascapes (where the horizon is always perfectly flat).

A CPL needs to be rotated for maximum effect (or the amount you want). CPLs are very
useful and I can't imagine leaving the house without one.

(You can how well a CPL works by holding two of them stacked up to eye, and rotating one.
A CPL is a sandwich of glass with plastic inside, so one has to be careful not to get it wet.
Lens cleaner goes on cloth, never on filter or lens.)

If you ever shoot for B&W, you can use a red filter to darken the sky. A Wratten #25 filter
will make the sky very dark.

Keith S Loc: Federal Way, Wa

Retired CPO,

Thanks, This lens is my widest at 67mm. My other lens is 58mm and I have the step down attachment so I only buy one set of filters.

Bipod

Yep. It matters whether one is using a prime with 7 elements in 5 groups (= 10 glass-air surfaces) or a zoom with
24 elements in 10 groups (= 20 surfaces).

You can get the same effect on a prime lens by screwing five filters to the front (don't worry, they're multi-coated!)
Only that's not as bad, because in a lens the group, he objective, is usually thick and always convex--perfect for
creating flare.

All that glass not only absorbs light (making the lens slower than its marked f/stop) and may create visible flare,
but it also creates insidious flare that reduces contrast. The image looks fine except the contrast has been reduced.

MTF charts for lenses use slow spacial frequencies within the field of view (black and white bands) as a measure
of contrast. But the worst flare is caused by bright lights (such as the sun) outside the field of view. So
MTF charts don't measure flare.

Because zooms are very susceptable to flare, one should always use a lens hood that matches the angle-of-view.
Unfortunately, the angle-of-view changes with the focal setting of a zoom.

Zooms before the 1980 were designed by hand, so they had a lot of aberrations and distortation. But all zoom
designs are a compromise, so all zooms have more aberrations and distoration (at least at certain focal settings)
and an equivalent prime.

The better corrected a zoom is, the more elements it has, so the more light it absorbs and the more flare it
creates. Manufactures try to reduce the flare with coatings, but no coating is perfect, and none will help
when a bright light from outside the angle-of-view strickes the objective of the lens.

Zooms are convenience lenses or for situations where there is no time to change lenses. (The are also good
for very high contrast scenes, as a way to reduce contrast. I carry one for this very purpose.)

Also, if you go way back, some prime lenses were less corrected, and so had more aberrations and distortion,
but fewer elements and groups, and therefore less absorption and flare.

There is no perfect lens. You pay your money and you take your choice, as the saying goes.
But if you pay a lot for a zoom lens, you are paying to get the least-bad bad lens, not the best lens.

Keith S Loc: Federal Way, Wa

Wow BiPod,

That is a lot of info. Thanks a ton.
Keith

srt101fan

Why are you recommendig a UV filter? I thought they had little effect on digital sensor....