Filters, filters, filters!
Aug. 6th, 2005 09:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icepixieWith an adaptor, my Olympus uses 55mm filters...which just so happens to be the size of the ones my dad has left over from his cameraphile days. So I bought my polarizer today, and now have inherited a starlight filter, diffuser (aka soft focus), UV haze, and blue and orange filters that I think are used to make outdoor film reproduce accurate colors inside and vice-versa, but which make interesting tones when used on a digicam.
Between us, I think![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
rowdycamels and I might photograph every square inch of Kenyon's campus this year...
Between us, I think
rowdycamels and I might photograph every square inch of Kenyon's campus this year...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-08-07 02:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-07 10:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-07 03:01 pm (UTC)stealappreciate your toys more. ; D Much fun next month!no subject
Date: 2005-08-07 10:33 pm (UTC)Ooooh, forgot about that. How's it doing?
Now why couldn't you use 52 mm filters? Then I could
stealappreciate your toys more. ; DHeh. Those Canons, always gotta be different...although these old filters are for a Canon film camera, so obviously they changed sometime in the last thirty years. What filters do you have besides your polarizer?
no subject
Date: 2005-08-08 02:03 am (UTC)Erm... on and off. It's usually okay, though. It's just frustrating that I can't trust it anymore. I was gonna get a new one, but... kinda broke right now. Maybe Christmas. That, and I was shopping around for a new brand, but... I love Canon! They make perfect cameras! Except for that thing where they self-destruct as soon as the warranty expires! I checked around, and it's not just my model that does it. It's pretty much every camera they make. Grrr. Because really, no other brand has the blend of features that I love Canon for. So... lots of frustration in the camera department right now, and a little bitterness. Rar.
Anyway. All I have is a circular polarizer and a UV right now. I'm waiting to see what size new camera I get before buying anything new. Although I do have some post-production filter effects in my image editor, which are fun. I may have to play with your camera a teensy bit. : )
no subject
Date: 2005-08-09 05:55 am (UTC)Um, it might be time to consider another brand of camera. Just sayin'.
Because really, no other brand has the blend of features that I love Canon for.
What kinds of features, exactly?
Anyway. All I have is a circular polarizer and a UV right now. I'm waiting to see what size new camera I get before buying anything new. Although I do have some post-production filter effects in my image editor, which are fun.
You could always get a step up/step down ring for your new camera if the thread sizes don't match. But if you're getting a new camera soon, it's probably better just to wait, yeah. And Photoshop effects are fun, but unfortunately, they can't do much for an overexposed photo, which is basically what I got my polarizer for...although the more I play with it, the more I realize I actually need a graduated neutral density filter for what I want to do, which is have both a bright sky and a darkish foreground correctly exposed. *sigh* Any tips for using a polarizer? The 90-degrees-from-the-sun thing seems to help a bit, but I'm really not seeing much difference when I use mine.
I may have to play with your camera a teensy bit. : )
Hehehe.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-16 05:02 am (UTC)grumblegrumblegrumble
What kinds of features, exactly?
Erm, let's see... at least 3x zoom, some aperture variety (weirdly, it's hard to get anything above f4 or so - but, but, landscapes! Meh! So I want at least f8, if I can get it. Can you get lens attachments that give you more depth of field?), um, the A95 had that nifty tilty flippy lcd screen that looked infinitely useful, I'd really like to get a camera that uses CF cards, because I have like 6 of them already, ditto on the AA batteries (besides, it's easy to find emergency replacements when they die), lots of manual options, like shutter speed/aperture and exposure, a video function, and I like the panorama function... see, I'm not picky at all....
You could always get a step up/step down ring for your new camera if the thread sizes don't match.
True. But still, camera accessory purchases are on hold until I get this whole Canon thing sorted out.
they can't do much for an overexposed photo, which is basically what I got my polarizer for...
Yeah, aren't polarizers great? I just hadn't bothered buying any colored ones, though.
although the more I play with it, the more I realize I actually need a graduated neutral density filter for what I want to do, which is have both a bright sky and a darkish foreground correctly exposed.
Yeah, I ran into the same problem. Polarizer helps a bit, as do composing tricks, but an nd filter is definitely next on my wish list once I get a good camera.
but I'm really not seeing much difference when I use mine.
Yeah, a lot of times it doesn't change much, because the camera automatically adjusts the exposure to compensate for the extra darkness. But I do notice a difference when I use it on water with glare (less sparklies, darker water), or with big patches of sky (they're definitely bluer). And sometimes it just subtly deepens the colors a bit all over. But yeah, it's best with reducing glare on shiny things.
And this is just my personal preference, but I like slightly deeper, darker pictures, so I tend to crank down the exposure 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop. That helps with bright skies and stuff, although you have to be careful you don't get things too dark.
Oh, and the Royal Mail seems to have eaten one of my photography books. Hmph. Maybe it'll still show up...
no subject
Date: 2005-08-16 11:14 pm (UTC)Easy to do. Also, more zoom = way, way more fun. They seem to be making newer, less point-and-shoot but not quite professional cameras that start at 5x and go all the way up to mine at 10x. (Plus digital up to 40x! But seriously sucky quality on the digital, so I don't use it. But it's there if I want it.)
some aperture variety (weirdly, it's hard to get anything above f4 or so - but, but, landscapes! Meh! So I want at least f8, if I can get it. Can you get lens attachments that give you more depth of field?)
Really? When I was looking at cameras, they all came with at least f8. I think even the Canon A95 did. Weirdly, mine will only go up to f8 in manual or aperture-priority mode, but when I leave it on program or auto, I've seen it go up to f11. I totally don't get it. And I think aperture has to do with the focal length inside the lens, so probably there aren't DOF attachments.
um, the A95 had that nifty tilty flippy lcd screen that looked infinitely useful
That could have its uses.
I'd really like to get a camera that uses CF cards, because I have like 6 of them already,
Good point. I went with Olympus partially because it uses the cards I already have.
ditto on the AA batteries (besides, it's easy to find emergency replacements when they die)
That's good, too, but probably not as important as the cards.
lots of manual options, like shutter speed/aperture and exposure, a video function, and I like the panorama function... see, I'm not picky at all....
I should try out my panorama function one day. Hmmm. You know, I think there are some Nikons out there that you would like. I think they use CF cards, and they have all the features you want. The pictures at the digital camera review site aren't bad, either, although I think they tended to blow out the highlights more than I like. But then, most cameras do, even the Canons. The one I have now hardly ever does that. Anyway, maybe take a look at Nikon. I know Valerie has one that she's been using for a while now, over two years, I believe.
Yeah, I ran into the same problem. Polarizer helps a bit, as do composing tricks, but an nd filter is definitely next on my wish list once I get a good camera.
They're relatively cheap, aren't they? I think I saw one online for $10 or so that I might have to buy. Ooooh...
Yeah, a lot of times it doesn't change much, because the camera automatically adjusts the exposure to compensate for the extra darkness. But I do notice a difference when I use it on water with glare (less sparklies, darker water)
I tried it with water in the zoo, but I'm not sure if it was the polarizer or just changing positions that made the pictures better. It might have been a bit of both. And it seemed to make a difference shooting through glass when the glass was in shadow, but not when it was sunny. And it was just painful in the aquariums...it made the shutter speed to slow to handhold. *grump*
or with big patches of sky (they're definitely bluer)
I have noticed that. Clouds show up more, too. But it only works around sunrise/sunset, really. I guess I just hadn't noticed that the sky pretty much is white for a lot of the day here.
And sometimes it just subtly deepens the colors a bit all over.
My mother said that they work the very best on a big golden maple in fall. oh wait, what does Kenyon have ten billion of? Yeeeees...
And this is just my personal preference, but I like slightly deeper, darker pictures, so I tend to crank down the exposure 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop. That helps with bright skies and stuff, although you have to be careful you don't get things too dark.
I think part of my problem is that I'm attracted to shots with big contrast between the sky and the ground, leading to exposure issues. Argh.
Oh, and the Royal Mail seems to have eaten one of my photography books. Hmph. Maybe it'll still show up...
*sticks tongue out at Royal Mail*
no subject
Date: 2005-08-19 11:03 pm (UTC)Really? Hm. Most of the ones I saw said "aperture - f2.8-3.2" or something pathetic like that. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong cameras...
And I think aperture has to do with the focal length inside the lens, so probably there aren't DOF attachments.
Yeah, I think you have to buy whole new lens attachments, and... bleh.
You know, I think there are some Nikons out there that you would like. I think they use CF cards, and they have all the features you want.
Hmmmm, Nikon... admittedly, haven't given them much attention...
And it was just painful in the aquariums...it made the shutter speed to slow to handhold. *grump*
Oi, I feel your aquarium grump.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-20 04:29 pm (UTC)I think you might be. I don't remember seeing anything so pathetic as that on the ones you could change...
Yeah, I think you have to buy whole new lens attachments, and... bleh.
I think you might be able to force more depth of field if you bought a larger telephoto lens, but I could have the math wrong on that. Anyway, those are $150. (Well, the 8x one I was looking at when I was contemplating the Canon is, anyway. Plus it's heavier and harder to handle.)
Hmmmm, Nikon... admittedly, haven't given them much attention...
They make nice cameras.
Oi, I feel your aquarium grump.
Arrrrggghhhh.