Suggested filters for landscape photography

ScarySquirrel

ScarySquirrel

ScarySquirrel

Soldato
Joined
13 Jan 2004
Posts
23,917
Location
South East
Hello,

I am hopefully off to Cornwall in a month or two and I know that you can get some fantastic landscape shots down there. I would be using my Sigma 17-70mm as it is the widest lens I have.

What filters would you suggest I pick up to help me with landscape work (could you possibly suggest specific brands and actual filters please :))

I expect a CP and an ND grad filter would be good. But I have no idea which ones would be good for me. I think the thread size is 72mm

Thanks in advance.
Oh, also, I do have a tripod in case anyone recommends I get one :)

One more thing, I know an ND grad reduces the amount of light into the lens, meaning you can have longer shutter times. But what is the actual benefit of this? Do you get more detail or something? Is it suggested to get one that is a gradient so that you can only cover the sky with it? Is that the main benefit?

Should i get a hard or soft one? So many questions :(

Sorry, I keep editing in more questions. For landscape photography is bracketing a good idea? Do I need to take 3 exposures even if I shoot in RAW format. Is it easy to save 3 different exposures of an image and then combine them? Does this make it an HDR image or can you do this to get a perfect exposure all over and NOT make it HDR (I don't want to do HDR images, but might try at some point)
 
Last edited:
My word that was a lot of questions.

The Nd grad is a neutral density graduated filter. ie it introduces no colour shift and is graduated in it's effect along one axis. the step change in its density can vary from filter to filter. choose one you like the look of. What's it for? it's very usefull to reduce the brightness of part of the frame to aceive a more even exposure across the frame. usually for landscapes, the sky is way beyond the exposure value of the scene, using an nd grad we can pull this back down to a value that is within the range of the metered scene.

err that sounds complex... but all we use it for (mostly) is to darken bright skies...

A Nd filter (not grad) does the same over the whole image, some people find these usefull.

you'll loose nothing but space by bracketing, I still routinely do so, but then this might be a hang over from film days...


HDR is another topic... I'll leave this for someone else...
 
Yeah sorry it was a lot of questions.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Can someone tell me what the benefit of an ND filter is? If all it is doing is reducing the amount of light to the sensor, why not just change the aperture?

I think I will try and pick up a 3 stop hard grad and a 2 stop soft grad, as an online guide suggested that was a good start for beginners. Can you combine a grad filter with a CP filter?

Would anyone suggest a filter holder over getting screw on filters?
 
Last edited:
ScarySquirrel said:
Thanks for taking the time to reply. Can someone tell me what the benefit of an ND filter is? If all it is doing is reducing the amount of light to the sensor, why not just change the aperture?
Click to expand...

They are usefull if you want to slow the shot down ever more than using the minimum aperture allows. For example I use a 10stop one to allow me to take 2-3 minute exposures of the sea during daylight. :)
 
you can usually combine filters though it might lead to vignetting at wide angels for lens mounted filters.

we use nd filters as we may have a desired exposure. ie we may know we want f16 (for instance) for the required depth of field and also want a particular shutter speed (for wind or wave motion for example). if this gives us a value of exposure that is over exposed, then we need to bring it down by using faster ISO or an ND filter.
 
Ok cool, thank you.

I think I will get a CP filter for day to day stuff and also some ND grad filters at the end of the month when I get paid.

Any recommendations as to what would be a good start for me? Hard or soft/what fstop? etc.
 
platypus said:
Any examples? I've no idea what that looks like.
Click to expand...

Beached_rock_by_MessiahKhan.jpg

:)
 
platypus said:
Any examples? I've no idea what that looks like.
Click to expand...

Don't give him excuses to post more pictures ;) (Fantastic work as usual)

I much prefer the filters route to HDR in my opinion an ND Grad will generally give you a much nicer more natural effect in a landscape shot, I wouldn't be without my polariser but you'll probably find it more useful in the summer than at this time of year as it costs you a couple of stops.

FSTOP11's shopping list looks to have all the bases covered.
 
ScarySquirrel said:
Sorry, I keep editing in more questions. For landscape photography is bracketing a good idea? Do I need to take 3 exposures even if I shoot in RAW format. Is it easy to save 3 different exposures of an image and then combine them? Does this make it an HDR image or can you do this to get a perfect exposure all over and NOT make it HDR (I don't want to do HDR images, but might try at some point)
Click to expand...

You say you don't want to do HDR, can I ask why? HDR when done well can produce great looking natural results. As the images you take have a low dynamic range, using multiple exposures will allow for more detail to be seen in your photos in the shadows and highlights, giving a result more like what you see with your eyes. It is how you process the images which is the key factor.

The purpose of HDR is to produce the most natural representation of the images, however some people can do the processing differently to get more "artistic" effects, which look nothing like the original. Applying HDR for the sake of it is pointless, but in the right situation can significantly improve a photo.

Cykeys HDR Guide is probably worth a read as it covers a few different things, including using one RAW file or 3. If you are setting up a tripod anyway then providing you have the storage space on your cards it's worth taking 3 (or more) as when you come to process the files the shadows will have less noise if you try to lighten them a bit.

The article over at wikipedia also explains it in more detail but less about the processing.
 
I think hes quite entitled to not want to do HDR. I know a few semipros and professionals who dont want to go near HDR.
While its true that when very lightly done it can present a natural looking photograph but the concept of HDR is still to its own style and it just doesn't sit well with people.

I find that whenever I open a HDR thread in many forums I am greeted by the same style of over cooked bursting saturated photos that make me wish I hadn't click open in the first place.

There are people about who are producing very good quality HDR images but those people in come in few numbers.

My main problem with HDR is that some people leave no shadows in their photos whats so ever and it looks awful.

No doubt that HDR is a good tool non the less.
 
Fstop11 said:
Neutral Densitiy 6, 8, 10
Neutral Densitiy Gradulated 2, 4, 6
Cir Polariser

mk great shot again mate :)
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was after, thanks mate :)

Jotun said:
You say you don't want to do HDR, can I ask why?
Click to expand...


Oh don't get me wrong, it is something I want to try at some point. But at the moment I want to try and get better and more natural looking shots :)

Thanks for the links though.
 
Assuming you have Photoshop or something similar, you can get better results than ND Grads give by combining multiple exposures in post processing. I'd get a CPL above all as it's impossible to replicate any other way, and then some non-graduated NDs if you want to try some longer exposures.

Oh, and go to Porth Nanven!
 
King4aDay said:
Assuming you have Photoshop or something similar, you can get better results than ND Grads give by combining multiple exposures in post processing. I'd get a CPL above all as it's impossible to replicate any other way, and then some non-graduated NDs if you want to try some longer exposures.

Oh, and go to Porth Nanven!
Click to expand...

Yeah I will make sure I visit there :)
 
sorry for the hijack but if you use a nd4 and a nd8 together - does that in theory make it an nd12? I.i a 12 stop filter
 
33L said:
sorry for the hijack but if you use a nd4 and a nd8 together - does that in theory make it an nd12? I.i a 12 stop filter
Click to expand...

From what I gather, an ND12 is not a 12 stop filter, a glance at wikipedia, and an ND12 would give a reduction of just over 3 f-Stops.

I'm not an expert on ND filters so hopefully someone else can clarify/confirm?
 
after reading that then i guess its not! 10 stop filter must be like welding glass
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom