File :-(, x, )
Another Obligatory Equipment Thread Anonymous
So /p/ let's talk about filters since I'm looking to add a couple to my arsenal. More specifically a Hoya HMC Circular Polarizer and a Hoya ND4 filter.

Which filters do you use and which do you find are the essentials? Photo Examples encouraged.
>> Anonymous
i just ordered a http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/181625-REG/B_W_66025842_72_mm_Kaeseman_Circular.html
i have a hoya SHMC circular 52mm too, and it works fine, but i wanted to try out B+H for my 72mm since ive heard a lot of good things about them. im looking into ND filters too, but havent gone too far into them. with digital, thats pretty much the only two youll need. maybe a soft focus/diffusion filter if youre doing portraits.
>> so i herd u leik monopods des
>>55616
orange #21
Nice for a little drama in landscapes and nice for removing blotchy/acne skin (bw film)
A lot of people I talk to hate 21 because it's too little/too much- they either want the paler yellow/orange or just straight red. I dunno.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
A Hoya R72 IR filter is an essential. Picture related.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A630Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2007:05:15 15:22:00Exposure Time15 secF-Numberf/8.0Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.30 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1436Image Height1077RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>55627
It's called photoshop dude. Do you know it?
>> Anonymous
>>55616
You need to construct additional pylons
>> Anonymous
This is relevant to my internets.

I love to shot landscapes a lot, but the thing is that I get my sky overexposed. As far as I know I should get some kind of UV polarizer filter, now /p/ recommend me some.
>> elf_man
Hoya and Tiffen both seem to be good choices for polarizers. Otherwise a grad filter is good for getting the sky but leaving the landscape alone. Polarizer's more useful all-around, though.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Grab an IR filter as well and you're set. Maybe a few more ND filters, depends on how much you like to play with at kind of stuff.

If you do a lot of macro, consider a bellows as well.

Polarizer is required for nature, and an ND is nice to have for more surrealistic effects.

Grab the polarizer first though, you'd be surprised at how often you want to pull off some of the reflection of something. Like a forehead in portrait, a window in the street, or that sheen off leaves for landscapes.

other than that the only thing missing is a stack of memory cards

pictured is IR using a cokin P series filter. While tempting to get, 1 filter for all different sizes of your lenses, I've had some serious glare problems with it, though I have not bought one of their special hoods for it yet.
>> Anonymous
That looks like taken straight from the Silent Hill, in before get back to /v/

Great shot, love it!
>> Anonymous
http://tinyurl.com/2rh4gg

Hmm, I'm thinking about this one - cheapest I could find, LOL. So, how much does it suck? Compared to high-end ones it does a lot, but what about real life? Could I live with it or it is the same difference as DSLR and point&shoot is, if you know what I mean?
>> Anonymous
>>55664
Those are hoya's "green series" of filters. They're made in the Philippines instead of in Japan and for a cheap UV glass protector, they're fine.

Personally, I'd spend a few more bucks for an HMC polarizer over the green series polarizers. If you know you'll be owning it for a long time, even spending double that price will not seem like much over a few years.
>> Anonymous
>>55665
Hmm, I see your point.

So I like have D40 with a kit lens and the thing is that lens kind of rotates when it focus. My question is: would it affect my experience with polarizer filters?
>> Anonymous
>>55674
If the front element rotates when you focus or zoom, it will be annoying but possible to use a circular polarizer. You just have to focus, and then re-adjust the polarizer filter. It tends to be easier if you use manual focus, and I do it for my one big 70-210mm zoom.
>> Anonymous
>>55676
I see, thanks Anon!
>> elf_man
Polarizers are fine on the d40 kit lens, they don't rotate while focusing. I have one.
>> des
>>55633
of course, but why leave work for myself later when taking two seconds to screw a filter in now can do much of it for me
>> Anonymous
Hey /p/ is it safe to stack filters from different brands on an auto-focus lens?
>> Anonymous
>>55961
the lens will explode if you do that
>> Anonymous
OH SHI-
>> Anonymous
>>55633

see

>>55647.

Photoshop replaces filters used to control color, not any others.

You could use it, also, I suppose, as a substitute for a ND filter in many situations, but if the thing is going to be so overexposed without a ND filter that information is lost, good luck fixing that in Photoshop. Same goes if one exposes a scene for a dramatic sky effect and the land is too dark to get stuff out of it. Use a ND grad filter.
>> Anonymous
Dear,>>55975
it seems>>55633was referring to a post that only talked about orange 21 filters, which is a color filter, which could be done in photoshop.>>55647had nothing to do with that response. no one suggested using photoshop as a replacement for an ND or polarizer or anything.
>> Anonymous
gear whore!
>> ??????? !KEBab7wem6
>>55976

But Photoshop does not completely replace colored filters, since it's *always* better to get your exposure right and do minimal work afterwards.

Now, if you just want to play around..
>> Anonymous
>>55976
>>55975
for black and white film there are effects created by color filters that you can not do in photoshop. Also as>>55990said you should always filter rather than say in your head "I'll do it in shop" Every global change you make in photoshop degrades the image slightly and trust when you get enough of them it looks like complete shit.
>> Anonymous
>>55992
for the most part, the effects of a color filter on black and white can be replicated with a color photo in photoshop in mixing it right. by adding these filter effects you are just changing the intensity of the pixels depending on what settings you use, which does nothing to degrade the quality.
>> ??????? !KEBab7wem6
>>56015

This is what's degrading the quality, because when you're intensifying pixel color values enough, you'll also get grain in severe cases; in the end, no picture is grain free. Also, most filters tend to eat away light intensity as well, which results in a kind of ND-ish behavior.

Personally, if I want to achieve a look, I'd rather shell out the extra $ for a filter or two, and use the filters, instead of shopping it afterwards, unless I feel like playing around.
>> Anonymous
Well some1's an obsessive compulsive photographer! Good God, Man, get ur self a gal!
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
i use filters almost all the time with B&W film.

Yellow is a very good general purpose filter for B&W, almost a must. Gives it good over all contrast, brings clouds out of the blue, kind of like a CPL filter, darkens blues and brightens reds and yellows.

Orange makes blues a lot more darker, almost black and reds are quite bright. gives strong contrasts.

Red gives very sharp contrasts, normally used with EIR films.

Green is also a usefull filter for B&W, takes pics that are closer to what your eyes see, brings the reds out without making them white. And the sky and portrait will be reproduced in a more moderate and mild tone.

I use Cokin filters for all colours except yellow where i have a screw in filter as it stays on my camera most of the time.
>> Anonymous
>>55990
I disagree, when shooting in color. (See other people's posts later on about color filters on B&W.)

A color filter has one set color value; Photoshop has a huge range of thousands of different precise "filters" that can be applied. Much more creative control. I suppose a color filter could be used to get it closer to what is desired, and then have it fine-tuned in Photoshop, but that's just redundant IMO.

(Poster you're responding to here.)
>> Choamsky
>>55616

I really hope the owner of all this stuff is a highly paid professional. That's just way too indulgent for the average photographer.

Yes, I'm jealous.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>56122
to be honest, he has a lot of unnecessary gear.
like 3 light reflecting discs, one should be enough. and 4(or 5) camera bags???
really, he's got one canon body, 2 zooms, 2 primes, what looks to be a F90x, a couple of Holga's (not expensive cameras anyway). a lot of what i think is unnecessary cleaning gear (i'm a bit crude when it comes to cleaning, but it works), 2 tripods and a monopod, and just some random bits and pieces like camera batteries and charger and CF bla bla.

i'm sure if i pulled everything apart and included every bit and bob, i can double his collection.
It just looks a lot (but does look impressive at first sight)
>> Anonymous
>>55720
Because you have barely any control with filters. If it failed, it failed, and you can't redo the color effect. Have fun coming home thinking "I'd rather had it in red.."
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
     File :-(, x)
I keep my equipment real simple and it's never failed me yet. I have never had, or had the need, for more equipment than this. This is all i carry.

As for polarizers: I love them. I've never had a need to use a different colored filter, etc, so i'm a bad judgement on that.

>>55961
I wouldn't stack filters ever; you're going to get less picture area and dark corners. At least that's what i've seen from experience with other friends-i've never seen a need to stack them myself. All i need is a polarizer.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeAsahi Optical Co.,LtdCamera ModelPENTAX Optio 330Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.6Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:06:16 11:06:59Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/2.6Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashFlashFocal Length7.60 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width768Image Height1024
>> Anonymous
>>56171
Do you folks have a separate set of filters for each of your filter sizes, or are you stepping them up/down?

Anon is considering buying some filters, and needs to know
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>56185

I keep a polarizing filter on the end of each of my lenses at all times, except when i'm doing night photography. I dont' do any changing, i just always keep them matched to the size of the lens.
>> elf_man
Both of my lenses are 52mm, so I bought one polarizer and just switch it. If I had different sizes I'd probably just do one for each, cause I don't ever plan on having a cartload of lenses.
>> Anonymous
>>55961

Sure, but be aware with more filters there will be more vignetting.
>> bw !ef8V18P/FY
     File :-(, x)
>>56171
I'm with you. Less is more. Rebel XT with grip, 28/2.8, 50/1.8II, 135/2.8, and 420EX, all with logos taped over with black tape and that evil wretched worthless stock "EOS DIGITAL! STEAL ME PLEASE!" strap replaced with a plain thin black one I took off a 30-year-old Nikon.

Also, a beautiful manfrotto 055CL tripod with joystick head that sits in my closet and collects dust, and a tamrac bag. I hate the color, but love the fact that it fits the above gear exactly without any wasted space, and with any one of the three lenses mounted and ready.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeOLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTDCamera ModelC150,D390Camera Software41-1001Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution144 dpiVertical Resolution144 dpiImage Created2003:04:13 17:48:03Exposure Time333/10000 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeSpotLight SourceFine WeatherFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1600Image Height1200RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalCompression SettingSHQMacro ModeNormal
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
No no no. You've got it all wrong. Moar cameras and gear = better photographer. Also, if you have more cameras, it means your penis is bigger.

You'll never be good photographers if you can't master basics like this.

(Not pictured: The PowerShot A95 I used to take this shot, the tripods I was too lazy to go collect from my car and my bedroom, and probably a few random bits of photography equipment I forgot)
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>56413

Gee, is someone compensating? :)
>> bw !ef8V18P/FY
>>56413
I'll forgive you for the TLR alone! I can't quite make it out from the image. Is that a Yashicamat?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>56415
Close, but no cigar. Think cheaper. Yashica A.

See, *quantity*, not quality, that's the key.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>56415
In case anyone else was wondering, here's a cheat sheet. I can't remember what the one labeled "Um. Something" is--I just got it yesterday. See, I wanted to buy the flash that was attached to it (see the side of the TLR), the guy wanted $18, I thought that was a good deal. Turns out it was $18 for the flash, the camera, the little bracket to attach the flash to the camera, and the bag it was in. Pretty sweet deal, I thought.

Dunno about the functionality of that camera. All the rest work, although the Argus' rangefinder mechanism is misaligned to the point of uselessness.

Also also, I forgot to label my Minolta Hi-Matic 7s. That's the unlabaled camera in the picture.
>> Anonymous
How the fuck should I take a picture of my camera if I'm taking a picture of it!?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>56422
That's a good question.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiFirmware Versionware 1.0.5Owner NameownSerial Number0420104373Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationLeft-Hand, BottomHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:06:17 20:35:55Exposure Time1/50 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length45.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3888Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Well, I thought since everyone else was doing it, I might as well too.

I usually run either Tiffen or Canon filters, with the exceptions of 3 Kenko jobs (a circular polarizer, blue enhancer, and Sky-1A) that I bought in Japan a few years ago. IMO, I'd say that out of the half dozen or so I have right now I'd want a circular polarizer, Sky-1A, and Red 25 if I had to choose three.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeKONICA MINOLTACamera ModelDiMAGE X1Camera SoftwareDiMAGE X1 Ver1.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.4Focal Length (35mm Equiv)37 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:06:18 09:02:40Exposure Time0.8 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating160Brightness-1.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.70 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2048Image Height1536RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
Oh.
My.
GOD!
How did you DO that?!
>> Anonymous
>>56424

This smacks of witchcraft if you ask me. Someone got some truck wit da Devil in /p/ today.
>> Anonymous
>>56424
Heh. Not bad.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>56424
>> Anonymous
>>56424
Pshhh, what a nub. A plastic silver colored SLR? Come on.
>> des
>>56424
omg h4x
>> Anonymous
>>56425
interesting strap system, who's it made by?
>> Anonymous
>>56425

FINALLY someone with an EOS 3. <3
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>56450
Please see
>>56418
>> Anonymous
>>56492

Tamrac. The QD's here are handy since I don't have to clobber the inside of my bag with straps. Op/Tech and Lowepro both make similar things, so it would default to what you're after and how comfortable things are for the back of your neck.

>>56510

Ahh, but of course. I've had mine for about six months now. For me it was a choice between that and a EOS-1V RS. Since I could not find a decent RS at the time, I went with the EOS-3 and have not looked back.

Similarly, it is nice to see someone else with one as well. It's been my experience that they are somewhat sought after for some reason or another.
>> OP Anonymous
Hey guys, if anyone is interested you can check out the gear in the first photo at the original flickr page.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fensterbme/146115285/
>> Anonymous
>>56546
How big an upgrade would you say the EOS 3 is over an Elan 7? I like my Elan plenty but I've been considering getting the EOS 3 for spot metering. Is there any other real advantage to the 3 over the 7?
>> bw !ef8V18P/FY
>>56562
Much better autofocus, better weather-proofing, better viewfinder, eye control (if you have the 7 and not the 7E), a few other minor things. If you do sports, photojournalism, or wildlife shooting you'll love the 3's autofocus. The viewfinder is great for portraits and landscapes, you'll be able to manually focus more easily than with your Elan 7.

The 3 is a little bulkier and a lot louder than the Elan 7, though. It's not the best camera for candids or street shooting.
>> Anonymous
>>56562
>>56587

>>56546here. I agree, the 3 has a wonderful autofocus and it does quite well (even in low light with the low-end lenses I have now). Insofar as noise from the winder goes, I've found that it is a little loud but not so much so that it is a distraction.

The one problem that I have had with it is the eye control focus. I am left handed (and left eye dominant) and have gone through the manual specified calibration routine but still have problems with this feature. I handed the camera off to a friend of mine (who is right eye dominant) and he was able to use my eye control settings without a problem, so I am wondering if that may be the issue.

As has been said, the 3 is (IMO) a big step over the Elan 7. For starters, you're looking at a 45-point AF system versus the 7-point in the Elan.

Second, it is essentially an EOS-1 without the magnesium case, so you've got all of the functionality of that body (including the weatherproofing) with slightly lower weight. (BH sez the 3 weighs in at 1.72lb without the PB-E2 versus the 1 which is at 2.10, also without booster.)

If you're going to do it, I'd seriously think about getting the PB-E2. The additional controls and increase in frame speed are well worth the cost.

Oh, and I'm hijacking your filter thread and turning it into a discussion about the EOS-3.