When to use ND filter or CirPolarizer?

Netgarden

I've used the ND's with IR on my Sony camera, but was wondering, in landscape situation:

When should you use a N Density filter in standard landscapes, and when to use Circular Polarizers? I'm not sure what the difference is?

And is a ND no.2 a good idea in bright situations like mid day? Or would that be the time for a Circular polarizer? [I bought a new lens and found some decently priced Hoyas]
Thanks for any info!

Khaos

NDs for when you want to slow the shutter speed down in sunlight. The most common is to get those neat misty waterfalls. It will alllow you to shoot in daylight at such a slow shutter speed without blowout.

The polarizer is for either to prevent glare or reflection from a bright sun or to deepen color contrast. Put on a pair of polarized sunglasses and see the change in colors to get an example. I love my B+W polarizers. They make all the difference for water shots.

tlittleton

I was wanting to ask that same question. I was shooting midday today and everything turned out great except the sky, which was a little too bright. I was thinking of maybe getting a graduated ND to try and keep the sky from blowing out. Don't they make them in halves and quarters too?

wxwax

tlittleton wrote:

I was wanting to ask that same question. I was shooting midday today and everything turned out great except the sky, which was a little too bright. I was thinking of maybe getting a graduated ND to try and keep the sky from blowing out. Don't they make them in halves and quarters too?

If you get something like the Cokin system, you can adjust for yourself where the divider should be on a graduated ND filter. Just slide the thing up and down.

tlittleton

wxwax wrote:

If you get something like the Cokin system, you can adjust for yourself where the divider should be on a graduated ND filter. Just slide the thing up and down.

That's the square filter system that mounts to your lens, right?

I've seen those, but was a little leary of getting something like that. Mainly because I didn't know if I'd need one for each lens, or if it would work for all of my lenses.

devbobo

tlittleton wrote:

I was wanting to ask that same question. I was shooting midday today and everything turned out great except the sky, which was a little too bright. I was thinking of maybe getting a graduated ND to try and keep the sky from blowing out. Don't they make them in halves and quarters too?

Thomas,

The graduated ND filter is an option, but it's just one more thing to carry.

You can achieve the same result by taking two exposures. One exposed for the foreground and one exposed for the sky and then blend them together in post.

Check out this tutorial written by luben...
http://solev.net/tutorials/stacking_intro.htm

Cheers,

David

devbobo

Linda,

I typically used my Circular polarizer at the beach or somewhere I really want to enhance the blueness of the sky/water.

Additionally, u can use to reduce reflections in glass, water, etc. For example shooting through a window, you should be able to eliminate the reflection in the glass.

Cheers,

David

tlittleton

devbobo wrote:

Thomas,

The graduated ND filter is an option, but it's just one more thing to carry.

You can achieve the same result by taking two exposures. One exposed for the foreground and one exposed for the sky and then blend them together in post.

Checked this tutorial written by luben...
http://solev.net/tutorials/stacking_intro.htm

Cheers,

David

Thanks for the tip David.

Netgarden

tlittleton wrote:

Thanks for the tip David.

Thanks for the info everyone, and dave for the link.
What about those days where its beautiful out, not too blown out with glare. Do you shoot with no filters then?
I was wondering if investing $20 on a ND+2 IS WORTH IT JUST TO HAVE IT?
sorry about caps, lol, accident

I have a UV, and circular polarizer and like the CP, but which one takes all the sparkle out of water? The UV?

Thanks guys..:): I guess my assignment tomorrow is to go try the same shot with all of them so I get the picture better...;~)

Ohh and I see alot of good info in the Yosemite/buy for post. Great reading, thanks!

wxwax

Net, the polarizer will fix the water. Don't forget to rotate it to see the variations it offers.

pathfinder

tlittleton wrote:

That's the square filter system that mounts to your lens, right?

I've seen those, but was a little leary of getting something like that. Mainly because I didn't know if I'd need one for each lens, or if it would work for all of my lenses.

The Cokin filter holder accepts a threaded adapter for almost any size of filter ring from 49mm to 82mm or so - I know I own the 58,67,72 and 77mm threaded rings that then snap into the filter holder to hold the graduated neutral density filters. Lee and Singh-Ray filters also fit this holder. Mine are from Singh-Ray and called a Galen Rowell set. also This is a much better system than a screw in GND filter, as it allows you to raise or lower the filter to place the area of gradient change precisely as you look through the image. With the screw in type it will be centered whether you want it centered or not.

The one disadvantage with the Cokin system is that is moves the filter out further from the front lens element as can cause vingetting with a wide angle lens.

tlittleton

Thanks for the info pathfinder. I may check that one out down the road.

pathfinder wrote:

The Cokin filter holder accepts a threaded adapter for almost any size of filter ring from 49mm to 82mm or so - I know I own the 58,67,72 and 77mm threaded rings that then snap into the filter holder to hold the graduated neutral density filters. Lee and Singh-Ray filters also fit this holder. Mine are from Singh-Ray and called a Galen Rowell set. also This is a much better system than a screw in GND filter, as it allows you to raise or lower the filter to place the area of gradient change precisely as you look through the image. With the screw in type it will be centered whether you want it centered or not.

The one disadvantage with the Coin system is that is moves the filter out further from the front lens element as can cause vingetting with a wide angle lens.

Angelo

lots of great info here; thanks everyone.

Netgarden

Would you use a NDno2 filter for a washed out bright day? Or would the UV suffice?
I'm still a bit confused. When is the best use of UV filters and when should you switch to a polarizer? Are they that similar? I did some shots today, with both , and also without any, and the only difference I saw was the photos were darker with the circular polarizer.

So generally speaking, you don't use them all the time? What makes you decide when to pop one on? thanks

Angelo wrote:

lots of great info here; thanks everyone.

Khaos

UV on a dslr is really only for protection of the lens. Mosts dslr's have their own UV protection built in. For washed out heavy sunlight, the circular polarizer will help in deepening the colors. You'd also want to lower the exposure a couple of ticks.

Netgarden

Thanks Khaos, appreciate the help. Now I just need to get out there more. Going to Yosemite soon, and don't want to muff up good shots ;~)
I also found this link, for anyone who wants added info:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/polarizers.shtml

Khaos wrote:

UV on a dslr is really only for protection of the lens. Mosts dslr's have their own UV protection built in. For washed out heavy sunlight, the circular polarizer will help in deepening the colors. You'd also want to lower the exposure a couple of ticks.