Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 2, 2008, 1:21 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 185
Default


Here's an experiment I did a few days ago.

I'm guilty about "forgetting" techniques that I used back in the film days. Since we don't need as many filters as we used to, I really hadn't given filters much thought recently. While reading a book about photographing art, crafts and collectibles,mention was made of using a polarizer to control glare from glass frames and cabinets. Of course, that's an old and well known technique. Then I pondered the difficulty I was having shooting some glossy objects and I realized that I hadn't considered a circular polarizer. Just my luck, checking my old photo stash revealed that I did NOT have a polarizer with 52mm threads used by the 50mm F2 lens. So I went and bought one (it's only money, I can just cut back on food for a couple of weeks).

I shot this example set using the camera locked on the tripod. Only the polarizer was used to make adjustments. I didn't reposition the lights at all. As you can see, the top photo is really unusable. The glare ruins it. The second photo with the polarizer correcting most of the glare is perfectly acceptable.






Brent Gair is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 2, 2008, 7:19 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,528
Default

Hi Brent

Nice comparison and really shows how usual a polarisre is... i still need to get one - I think for the 14-54. Nice models too!

Cheers

Harj


HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 2, 2008, 8:42 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
gwillys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 247
Default

hi Harj! thanks brent, thats great & you've given me some ideas. highlight clipping drives me nuts (its a short drive) and this looks like a good way to effectivly control it in some situations. i wonder how a linear polarizer would do. i have both so i'll give it a go.
gwillys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2008, 12:02 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

That comparison tells the story, doesn't it.

Funny you should bring this up, I went and bought a new circular polarizer the other day. Don't know what happend to the old one I picked up in Hong Kong. I took some snowy mountain shots and blue sky on a clear day and was so disappointed.


Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2008, 8:47 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 185
Default

Here's another expensive irony.

I've got six ZD lenses and four them use 58mm filters.

But I'm only interested in polarizers for two lenses...the only two that don't match: the 50mm (uses 52mm filters) and the 11-22mm (uses 72mm filters). The 11-22 is my "car show" lens and I'd love to get a polarizer on it. But a good 72mm polarizer is no small chunk of change.

It's one thing when you can shell out for a filter and use it on multiple lenses but it's annoying when a filter fits on ONE lens. I guess my only option is to find another ZD lens that uses 72mm filters .
Brent Gair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2008, 10:25 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

The one thing that polarizers used to be good at (aside from glare reduction) wasdeepening the color ofa blue sky. Over the years I've noticed that they don't do that very much anymore. Apparently the high volume of jet aircraft traffic (at least in North America) puts so much water vapor in the upper air that the sky is always a pale blue, and a polarizer doesn't really help very much. (Meteorologists note that during the first few days after 9/11, when all commercial air traffic was grounded, the skies became much more blue.)

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2008, 1:45 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
gwillys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 247
Default

yes, and the temperature rose. cp's are also good for shooting around water
gwillys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2008, 4:27 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

I should have said that I was wondering if I was the only one noticing the effect that polarizers don't deepen the blue of the sky anymore.

I can get what I want with PShop and the (great) add-onNik Color Efex, but I'm wondering if I'm missing something with how I use polarizers on a camera. I do know that they won't deepen the sky color unless you're aiming the camera 90ยบ from the sun, but nowadays that just makes the sky a deeper blue-gray, not a deeper blue.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2008, 11:37 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
boBBrennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas USA
Posts: 3,554
Default

........one I did with a CP and the 40-150. The sky turned out pretty nice in this one
__________
boBBrennan






boBBrennan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2008, 10:43 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

It sure did, Bob. But although I used to get that kind of result with a LP and film, I rarely get that kind of result anymore with a CP and DSLR.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:16 PM.