Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UV filter and night photography

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I went spotting last night and removed the UV filter from my lenses, but I still got some flare:



    Check the illumination towers, any suggestions on how to get rid of this? This one was taken behind the glass (terminal window).

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by PP-VRA
      I went spotting last night and removed the UV filter from my lenses, but I still got some flare:



      Check the illumination towers, any suggestions on how to get rid of this? This one was taken behind the glass (terminal window).
      Flare could come from the lens too. Some lenses are coated to minimize that, others are not. You can use the healing brush on it in PS.

      Comment


      • #18
        If your shooting through terminal windows your gona get lens flare on long exp when there are bright sources of light such as those poles. I can pretty much guarentee that if you were outside shooting that same photo you wouldnt get 1/2 has much glare.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by BA747-436
          Fireworks are a bugger to shoot mainly because the camera usualy picks up the light meter reading from the least bright part then gets all sorts of lens flare.
          Never use the camera's meter.

          Place the camera on the tripod.

          For most shots, position the camera vertically rather than horizontally.

          Turn your meter off, shoot manual only.

          Set focus to infinity.

          Use an aperture of F8 or smaller (higher number).

          Set the shutter to bulb. Use a cable release and a card to cover the lens iIf you're photographing multiple bursts.

          Exposure: try between 1/2 and 4 seconds; although one to two seconds seems to work best. Longer for multiple bursts.

          If possible, an ISO of 100 or below.

          Comment


          • #20
            Alright l'll take what you've said into consideration in future. Thanks for the helpful info.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by BA747-436
              If your shooting through terminal windows your gona get lens flare on long exp when there are bright sources of light such as those poles. I can pretty much guarentee that if you were outside shooting that same photo you wouldnt get 1/2 has much glare.
              Yes, I noticed that when I tried a few shots from a park nearby but there nothing to be done at GIG at night, there are no outside spots there that are any good at night (mostly because the planes are moving).

              But many thanks you your help!

              Comment


              • #22
                Recently i have been taking off my UV filters for general shooting as well as night shooting. If i am shooting in a controled enviroment then i take the uv filter off now. If i am shooting at the airport, or in the city or at the track then i leave them on.

                For night photography it is a cardinal sin to leave a filter on! lol

                Chris
                Chris Sharps
                5D3 | 5D2 | 7D | 1D2 | 10D | 400D | 1V | 3
                17-40F4L | 24-105F4LIS | 70-200F2.8LIS | 100-400LIS
                24F1.4L II | 50F1.2L | 85F1.2L II | 15F2.8 Fisheye | 50F1.4 | 100F2.8 Macro
                1.4x | 550EX x2

                Fuji X100

                Comment


                • #23
                  Price of a filter - £20
                  Price of a 100-400 L - £1200

                  I never take my filter off. If you are shooting in night conditions just change the filter to a skylight or similer that wont effect the photo.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Buying a £20 filter is the reason why a lot people get flare in their photos. the cheaper filters just do not control it as well as the more expensive ones do. I have a Hoya Super HMC Pro Slimline on my 17-40 and that controls flare the best out of all my filters but i still take it off now when shooting in controled enviroments.

                    I understand that a lens is a costly item to buy, but why spend £1200 on a lens and then put a £20 piece of glass in front of it when you want top quality out of the lens you have spent so much on??? My sigma 120-300 takes a 105mm filter and to get a high quality filter for it would cost me £150-£200, nearly the same as it would cost to replace the element!

                    Even on a 100-400 or a 70-200IS the front element replacement only runs to about £200-£300. My insurance would cover it so i dont worry about it too much anymore.

                    Camera insurance is the best accessory you can buy for your camera!

                    Chris
                    Chris Sharps
                    5D3 | 5D2 | 7D | 1D2 | 10D | 400D | 1V | 3
                    17-40F4L | 24-105F4LIS | 70-200F2.8LIS | 100-400LIS
                    24F1.4L II | 50F1.2L | 85F1.2L II | 15F2.8 Fisheye | 50F1.4 | 100F2.8 Macro
                    1.4x | 550EX x2

                    Fuji X100

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I dont think you understand what i meant. It was more the point that if for whatever reason a stone or something similer hits your £1200 lens its a write off. Wheras if you spent £20 on a filter it would break the filter not the lens. I wouldnt suggest getting a cheap sh*tty filter in any case. My filters cost around £60+ each. Im just saying even if you dont want a filter for effects etc just get one to protect your lens.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by BA747-436
                        If you are shooting in night conditions just change the filter to a skylight or similer that wont effect the photo.
                        Not intending to sound condescending or anything, but any filter will affect the image to a greater or lesser extent. Any air-to-glass surface, even when multi-coated, will reflect some light. Whether such reflections will be visible (among the reflections arising from the lens elements themselves) is another matter, obviously. In night-time conditions, where contrast tends to be extremely high, they just might...
                        If you really want to minimise reflections, you might even want to use a prime lens (with fewer lens elements) than a zoom lens, if that's an option.

                        Paul


                        Click Here to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I understand what your saying Dan. When i shoot motorsports or aviation or football or athletics or anything involving action or when i am running aroundi usually use a filter. However when i am in a studio shooting portraits, or shooting landscapes from a tripod i remove it as i am controlling the situation.

                          Oh and another thing, if a stone comes up and hits the lens then there is a fairly good chance you can just have the front element and maybe one or two planes of glass replaced for about £200-£300 from canon. I know that on the long canon teles (300F2.8LIS/400F2.8LIS/500F4LIS and 600F4LIS) that the front piece of glass you can touch is just there for protection and costs about £500 to replace. On the smaller lenses it is less.

                          I think we should agree to disagree on this point. I dont want to p**s you off or anything! Keep it friendly!

                          Cheers, Chris
                          Chris Sharps
                          5D3 | 5D2 | 7D | 1D2 | 10D | 400D | 1V | 3
                          17-40F4L | 24-105F4LIS | 70-200F2.8LIS | 100-400LIS
                          24F1.4L II | 50F1.2L | 85F1.2L II | 15F2.8 Fisheye | 50F1.4 | 100F2.8 Macro
                          1.4x | 550EX x2

                          Fuji X100

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            You havnt p*ssed me off at all mate. I agree with what your saying. I'll just reiterate my point. Its worth spending £20 (or £60 for a decent filter) on your £1200 lens even if its just to protect it. As you said it can cost upwards of £200-£500 to get the front element replaced. You do the math

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Ok, well thats good! I do understand your point! hehe

                              Cheers, Chris
                              Chris Sharps
                              5D3 | 5D2 | 7D | 1D2 | 10D | 400D | 1V | 3
                              17-40F4L | 24-105F4LIS | 70-200F2.8LIS | 100-400LIS
                              24F1.4L II | 50F1.2L | 85F1.2L II | 15F2.8 Fisheye | 50F1.4 | 100F2.8 Macro
                              1.4x | 550EX x2

                              Fuji X100

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X