Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/07/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]For what you are looking for I'd put a polarizing filter on. Not using it at full strength - otherwise it can make such water shots quite boring. (why take all the dazzle out?) - lead like. To me the main thing is sky control. Keeping the sky down. All kinds of ways of doing that in B&W. But with color and or digital about the only way is a polarizer. A circular one. Circles are great. Old Leica glass was made for polarizer use with neat turner built into the lens shade. That's R glass which does not concern us any more as they are on the way out. Use of a polarizers is such fun you're really hands on in real time controlling the look of an image on the groundglass. And in the print the effect seems even more worthwhile than you thought it was going to be. mark@rabinergroup.com Mark William Rabiner > From: Richard Taylor <r.s.taylor@comcast.net> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> > Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:51:15 -0400 > To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> > Subject: Are UV Filters Needed for Proper Exposure on the Water? [was Re: > [Leica] Ah! Back to the Great Filter Dispute!] > > Yesterday I checked exposure with and without the UV filter I use on > my lenses when shooting on the water. The subject was a sailboat on > Buzzards Bay on a bright but hazy day. (The typical Buzzards Bay > smokey southwester had filled in.) This is a situation ripe with UV. > > The exposure with and without the filter was the same to the accuracy > I can measure it in Lightroom. So, the Nikkor 70-200 mm, f2.8 zoom > with 1.4 teleconverter does not need a UV filter to expose properly on > my D300 as Henning had predicted. Presumably, this is also true of > other modern Nikkors. > > Regards, > > Dick > > > > On Jun 26, 2008, at 1:37 PM, Richard Taylor wrote: > >> I'm referring to modern Nikkors in this case. I haven't tried it >> with the Nikkors but my GRD2 underexposes by a a stop to a stop and >> a half out on the water. If I remember to do it, I'll try the >> lenses with and without the filters to see if there is a difference >> when I'm down on the Cape this weekend. >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Dick >> >> >> >> On Jun 26, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Henning Wulff wrote: >> >>> At 10:42 AM -0400 6/26/08, Richard Taylor wrote: >>>> Working from boats and at the seashore I find that a UV filter >>>> reduces the tendency towards underexposure caused by all that open >>>> sky. It also keeps salty spray off the front element. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Dick >>>> >>> >>> Richard, >>> >>> Under your shooting circumstances putting a protective filter on >>> makes sense, as salt spray doesn't help any equipment, and can be a >>> pain to get off. >>> >>> On the other hand on the topic of a UV filter reducing the tendency >>> to overexposure: I don't believe you....if you are using a Leica >>> lens produced in the last 30 years. All Leica lenses have a UV >>> blocking function built in. >>> >>> -- >>> * Henning J. Wulff >>> /|\ Wulff Photography & Design >>> /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com >>> |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information