Polarizing Filter
Started by
cyberhippie
, Feb 10 2008 06:49 AM
9 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 10 February 2008 - 06:49 AM
In a quest for those wonderfully dark and vivid mountain skies, I bought myself a polarizing filter today. A bit of a shock to the wallet but never mind if I get the colours, I want it will have been worth it!!
Does anyone know how much a UV filter will set me back in India say in Mumbai.
Does anyone know how much a UV filter will set me back in India say in Mumbai.
#2
Posted 10 February 2008 - 07:30 AM
You will get some filters dirt cheap in India. But the quality...
Anyways, in the digital age, I prefer the easy way:
No filter 'RAW image':

Minimal editing in Picasa, with a 'polarizer' kind of effect:
Anyways, in the digital age, I prefer the easy way:
No filter 'RAW image':

Minimal editing in Picasa, with a 'polarizer' kind of effect:
#3
Posted 10 February 2008 - 07:39 AM
Th UV filter is more for lense protection than anything else Hyderabadi, so cheap will be fine. Nice effect, photomatix achieves a similar result.
I just want to get a "live shot" Then I can see what I've got there and then.
I'll give it a test run tomorrow.
I just want to get a "live shot" Then I can see what I've got there and then.
I'll give it a test run tomorrow.
#4
Posted 10 February 2008 - 08:04 AM
Ah, the UV filters. they are cheap anywhere.
I even wonder if they do anything at all, like you say other than simply protect the lense, just a placebo effect, most times imho.
I've never found any differene, with or wihout.
OTOH, there are some pictures taken with that Zenit where a filter did make a real difference.
In my Dad's time, when he bought that Minolta (have it properly stored in Hyderabad btw) in 1969, he also bought some filters (yellow, orange, etc.) for B&W photography.
I find that feature 'digitally' in Picasa!
I even wonder if they do anything at all, like you say other than simply protect the lense, just a placebo effect, most times imho.
I've never found any differene, with or wihout.
OTOH, there are some pictures taken with that Zenit where a filter did make a real difference.
In my Dad's time, when he bought that Minolta (have it properly stored in Hyderabad btw) in 1969, he also bought some filters (yellow, orange, etc.) for B&W photography.
I find that feature 'digitally' in Picasa!
#5
Posted 10 February 2008 - 08:25 AM
Photomatix needs to be applied differently.. you need to take atleast 3 different 'bracketed' shots to start with.
#6
Posted 10 February 2008 - 08:44 AM
Being a crap photographer I always shoot bracketed with my Digi SLR, it seems to work for me. Fiddling with the white balance options and ISO also produces good results for a born amateur such as myself.
I can't wait to use it in India, I managed 2300 shots on a 5 week visit to Scotland, 4 months in India.........I better buy some more memory cards.
I can't wait to use it in India, I managed 2300 shots on a 5 week visit to Scotland, 4 months in India.........I better buy some more memory cards.
#7
Posted 10 February 2008 - 08:58 AM
Compared to Jorge and others, we are complete crap-shooting-amatuers!
I remember the time back in the 70's when my Dad's camera was a 'photocopy machine'.
They used to stick these college certificates etc., on the wall, take pictures and file them along with their resume, typed up on a centuries old typewriter...!
What lenses have you bought?
I remember the time back in the 70's when my Dad's camera was a 'photocopy machine'.
They used to stick these college certificates etc., on the wall, take pictures and file them along with their resume, typed up on a centuries old typewriter...!
What lenses have you bought?
#8
Posted 10 February 2008 - 09:05 AM
Just the one, a Tamron AF28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di
Seems like a good multipurpose lense, as I don't want to carry loads of stuff around with me.
Saved about 200 dollars on the this, as it was wrongly priced in the media store where I bought it, to my surprise they honored the listed price, saving me 150 Euros!!
Seems like a good multipurpose lense, as I don't want to carry loads of stuff around with me.
Saved about 200 dollars on the this, as it was wrongly priced in the media store where I bought it, to my surprise they honored the listed price, saving me 150 Euros!!
#9
Posted 10 February 2008 - 09:07 AM
It struck me that a tele convertor might be a good travel tool and not so expensive really??
#10
Posted 10 February 2008 - 09:35 AM
Nah, just stick with your 28-300 Tamron. My experience atleast.
I have a http://www.tamron.co.../18200_diII.asp which I keep on mostly. The more you zoom, greater the chance of a blurred picture. Unless you buy a tripod and a remote.
I also have a Canon 28 - 135 http://www.usa.canon...mp;modelid=7337 for low light stuff.
It's a great hobby, but it can also make you go broke, is all the advice I can offer.
I have a http://www.tamron.co.../18200_diII.asp which I keep on mostly. The more you zoom, greater the chance of a blurred picture. Unless you buy a tripod and a remote.
I also have a Canon 28 - 135 http://www.usa.canon...mp;modelid=7337 for low light stuff.
It's a great hobby, but it can also make you go broke, is all the advice I can offer.











