A few seascapes from Wales from yesterday.

An Exception said:
It's relevant to the suggestion of using ND grads. As I plan on upgrading to a D800, investing in very expensive ND grads won't be required.
Click to expand...

Then I'm afraid you'll still have bland boring skylines even with the D800 upgrade. I think you are putting far too much faith into camera technology this time mate. Cokin grad ND's aren't expensive, especially compared to the Lee filter set also.

You'll still need the filters regardless of which body you use as no amount of DR is gonna allow you to save every bit of detail in the shadows whilst preserving all the highlights at the same time. If you do multiple exposures you still have the issue of blurring due to things potentially moving (plants, trees, water etc) and if you try and just take 1 photo on a D800 and make duplicates of it in post to do a fake HDR, it'll STILL look garbage compared to the result you'd get from using a filter.
 
How much is a filter system for the 14-24?

Secondly with the first set, nd filters wouldn'y have changed the sky, it was a very cloudy day with no breaks in the sky.
Any thing in the foreground that is above the horizon would then also be underexposed, and look unnatural.

Lastly regarding the practical use of the D800, what you would do is expose roughly for the sky and use the gradient tool in lightroom or similar to increase exposure under the sky by a couple of stops. This gives the same practical effect as using an ND filter with no 'HDR look', and the D800 isn't going to struggle with a couple of stops exposure boost under the horizon. Sunset light is more balanced, and the DR within the scene wouldn't be an issue.
 
Last edited:
An Exception said:
How much is a filter system for the 14-24?

Secondly with the first set, nd filters wouldn'y have changed the sky, it was a very cloudy day with no breaks in the sky.
Any thing in the foreground that is above the horizon would then also be underexposed, and look unnatural.

Lastly regarding the practical use of the D800, what you would do is expose roughly for the sky and use the gradient tool in lightroom or similar to increase exposure under the sky by a couple of stops. This gives the same practical effect as using an ND filter with no 'HDR look', and the D800 isn't going to struggle with a couple of stops exposure boost under the horizon. Sunset light is more balanced, and the DR within the scene wouldn't be an issue.
Click to expand...

Ah so you didn't read anything what I put earlier then? ND filters change the sky regardless of how cloudy it is. Some of the best storm shots have been taken using graduated NDs lol. You didn't take these photos at the sunset or sunrise, you took them in what looks like the middle of the day so what are you even talking about?

I've already addressed the other point, which you obviously didn't read. Due to that, I'm out of this thread.
 
An Exception said:
It's relevant to the suggestion of using ND grads. As I plan on upgrading to a D800, investing in very expensive ND grads won't be required.
Click to expand...

No, it's totally irrelevant.

I can substitute the D800 and put any future camera in an answer whenever someone poses a question on any camera capabilities. "the 5Dii is rubbish", "that's fine, the 1Dx don't have that problem"

We are critics these photos, on how to improve these photos with your current gear.

The solution is not spend £2,500 to solve a £50 problem.
 
Last edited:
An Exception said:
RW2_0589-Edit.jpg
Click to expand...

An Exception said:
Check the exif
Also CPL doesn't work on UWA
Click to expand...

CPL's change the sky, not ND's
 
Raymond Lin said:
No, it's totally irrelevant.

I can substitute the D800 and put any future camera in an answer whenever someone poses a question on any camera capabilities.

We are critics these photos, on how to improve these photos with your gear.

The solution is not spend £2,500 to solve a £50 problem.
Click to expand...

Seriously your just looking to nit pick and bicker aren't you?
Am I not allowed to point out the usefulness of being able to capture a scene in a single frame and not have to fiddle with filters etc?

Oh, and more like a £300 problem.
 
If someone else posted these, what are you going to tell them? Spend £2,500?

Or do you tell them to get filters?

Improving your photography is not always about buying the best gear but work with what you have. It feels to me like you've lost the art and caring too much about the technology.
 
Raymond, unfortunately I think you missed my actual point, and are jumping all over a casual yet correct comment I made and trying to turn it into something it isn't.

No worries though man! :p
 
Personally, I like 3 and 8 although the horizon on 3 looks a bit off.
3 reminds of the bit in the POTC film when Jack is in Davey Jones Locker.

I think some of these definitely work with the slightly washed out colours.

Andrew
 
For me they would have been more interesting if you had found a subject, jammed a UWA lens to it and produced some distorted angles, but thats just me.
 
An Exception said:
CPL's change the sky, not ND's
Click to expand...

That's not strictly true. They cut out reflections such as those that cone off the sea. You can get some cool see-through water effects with CPLs. They do work on UWAs too so I don't know where you got that impression.

NDs can add interest to bland skies by giving interesting gradients to blues and clouds.

I don't think NDs and CPLs are always about maximising DR and turning skies bluer, they are extra tools you can use to create something a bit different.

For someone new to landscapes you certainy seem to have all the answers :p
 
oldbag said:
For me they would have been more interesting if you had found a subject, jammed a UWA lens to it and produced some distorted angles, but thats just me.
Click to expand...

^^^
Me to, that was my intention but I didn't have much time actually by the sea due to standing in water with a metal tripod + lightning.
 
olv said:
That's not strictly true. They cut out reflections such as those that cone off the sea. You can get some cool see-through water effects with CPLs. They do work on UWAs too so I don't know where you got that impression.

NDs can add interest to bland skies by giving interesting gradients to blues and clouds.

I don't think NDs and CPLs are always about maximising DR and turning skies bluer, they are extra tools you can use to create something a bit different.

For someone new to landscapes you certainy seem to have all the answers :p
Click to expand...

The effects of the CPL will only cover a portion of the frame on an UWA, so it won't give a uniform look, but if you like a non-uniform look, then I guess it works.
ND's as far as I'm aware only block light (and sometimes cause colour casts). The same gradient effects can be accomplished in LR using the gradient tool.
 
An Exception said:
^^^
Me to, that was my intention but I didn't have much time actually by the sea due to standing in water with a metal tripod + lightning.
Click to expand...

I took my tokina 11-16 to the sea and ended up taking non wide photos as I couldn't find anything suitable to jam the lens infront of to get interesting angles. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom