Mavic 2 Pro Filter Connection

[brettbrandon]

PolarPro has them...
Gradient Collection | Cinema Series | Mavic 2

 

[noosaguy]

PolarPro has them...
Gradient Collection | Cinema Series | Mavic 2

Is this for video or still photography? For photography, if you use post processing software like Adobe PS and LR, there is no need for gradient lens filters. The gradients built in to PS and LR dispenses with the need to use a gradient filter.
I purchased an expensive gradient filter for my DSLR's about 5 years ago and it's never been out its container. Not being a videographer, I can't comment on what's able to be done in post.

 

[zocalo]

Is this for video or still photography? For photography, if you use post processing software like Adobe PS and LR, there is no need for gradient lens filters. The gradients built in to PS and LR dispenses with the need to use a gradient filter.
I purchased an expensive gradient filter for my DSLR's about 5 years ago and it's never been out its container. Not being a videographer, I can't comment on what's able to be done in post.

For me, it's mostly for stills of sunrises and sunsets as even with raw images you can sometimes need a few extra stops on the sky to enable you to bring out all the really interesting textures, especially if a lot of the foreground is naturally dark and/or in shadow, e.g. a with the sun positioned behind a forrested mountain range. Doesn't take much - usually 2 stops is enough - but it can make a huge difference to the quality of your shadows and highlights without having to go down the multi-shot HDR route.

Horses for courses, obviously, but I use GNDs extensively with my SLRs and have already run into a few instances where I could definitely have benefitted from having one fitted on my M2P. So far I've managed to work around it by either exposing for the sky and teasing detail out of shadows or blending two images with different exposure comp settings depending on the DR required, but that's not going to work so well for some of the locations I visit and means more time in post as well. Not something I'm going to use a lot, sure, but enough that it's probably worth spending the $40 or so to have available for when I do.

 

[noosaguy]

For me, it's mostly for stills of sunrises and sunsets as even with raw images you can sometimes need a few extra stops on the sky to enable you to bring out all the really interesting textures, especially if a lot of the foreground is naturally dark and/or in shadow, e.g. a with the sun positioned behind a forrested mountain range. Doesn't take much - usually 2 stops is enough - but it can make a huge difference to the quality of your shadows and highlights without having to go down the multi-shot HDR route.

Horses for courses, obviously, but I use GNDs extensively with my SLRs and have already run into a few instances where I could definitely have benefitted from having one fitted on my M2P. So far I've managed to work around it by either exposing for the sky and teasing detail out of shadows or blending two images with different exposure comp settings depending on the DR required, but that's not going to work so well for some of the locations I visit and means more time in post as well. Not something I'm going to use a lot, sure, but enough that it's probably worth spending the $40 or so to have available for when I do.

Firstly, I am assuming, being a keen image maker, you use decent editing software (like Adobe LR and PS). I assume so if you're shooting in RAW.

If so, you do realise the M2P has a 5 stop (or 3) exposure bracket option? Okay so it's not customisable to provide greater DR, but it does a pretty good job and if you were to under expose slightly, with a bit of tweaking in PS or LR I'm sure you'd get great results. I think I recall you hit the nail on the head with GND's with the limitation being the horizon line, they're basically 50/50. Exposure bracketing at the time of shooting and using the inbuilt grad filter in many editing Apps is a great option IMO. In RAW there is a lot of information in shadows you can draw out but with a 1" sensor noise becomes a problem.

To give you an idea, the first 5 images are the brackets, the last is the HDR produced in LR. A nice result I reckon and with minimal noise.

 

[brettbrandon]

Here is the same image as above (with the ND8/PL) with about 30 seconds tweaking.
View attachment 52799

To me, this has that eerie look like just before a storm hits. The filter seems to mess with the white ballance a bit.
Here's the pic with a few moments spent on white ballance correction.

 

[Lon Denard]

Does anyone know if DJIs own 4 filter set for the M2P, ($99 on Amazon) comes with a case of some kind to keep the filters in?

Yes they do. A really nice case in fact.

 

[zocalo]

Firstly, I am assuming, being a keen image maker, you use decent editing software (like Adobe LR and PS). I assume so if you're shooting in RAW.

Absolutely I use raw and Photoshop, and yes, I'm aware of the M2P's HDR option. That's one of the approaches I've been using with the M2P in lieu of having a grad, and I'm actually quite impressed with the DR I can tease out of the M2P's raw files - most of the time it's more than enough. It's just that I prefer to avoid the "HDR look" whenever possible, even in corner cases like a subtle pastel sky and dark foreground, which is where the grads are going to come in.

It's weird, but there's definitely a perception issue with HDR images when you put them on the wall in a gallery, especially with outdoor landscapes (HDR can work really well for industrial interiors though). What I've found for landscapes is that unless the HDR processing is *really* subtle, in which case you could have probably have got the same result from a single well exposed raw, they're just not as popular. Clearly I have a different audience from the Instagram users that seem to lap them up...

 

[kilomikebravo]

..so I'm leaning towards a 2/4/6 stop (ND4/16/64) set of NDs and CPLs

Z: Do yourself a favor and add an ND32 to your order. It’s been my experience that this filter gets used the most on sunny days and with it, I can almost always get to f/4 or very close at 0EV.

KB

 

[noosaguy]

Absolutely I use raw and Photoshop, and yes, I'm aware of the M2P's HDR option. That's one of the approaches I've been using with the M2P in lieu of having a grad, and I'm actually quite impressed with the DR I can tease out of the M2P's raw files - most of the time it's more than enough. It's just that I prefer to avoid the "HDR look" whenever possible, even in corner cases like a subtle pastel sky and dark foreground, which is where the grads are going to come in.

It's weird, but there's definitely a perception issue with HDR images when you put them on the wall in a gallery, especially with outdoor landscapes (HDR can work really well for industrial interiors though). What I've found for landscapes is that unless the HDR processing is *really* subtle, in which case you could have probably have got the same result from a single well exposed raw, they're just not as popular. Clearly I have a different audience from the Instagram users that seem to lap them up...

You said it "unless the HDR processing is *really* subtle". I've found LR HDR isn't at all aggressive and I use it all the time. Frequency separation works well but is labour intensive and to be honest I don't see much advantage. The fact the Adobe has now designed their software to produce an HDR (or pano) in a RAW file is a winner. Still plenty of scope to work with.

As far as getting a result from, as you put it "in which case you could have probably have got the same result from a single well exposed raw", well that might apply to large sensor DSLR's but from 1" sensors you just don't have the latitude without introducing shadow noise.

 

[Lon Denard]

Z: Do yourself a favor and add an ND32 to your order. It’s been my experience that this filter gets used the most on sunny days and with it, I can almost always get to f/4 or very close at 0EV.

KB

My ND32 stays on the dronemost of the time.

 

[Lon Denard]

You said it "unless the HDR processing is *really* subtle". I've found LR HDR isn't at all aggressive and I use it all the time. Frequency separation works well but is labour intensive and to be honest I don't see much advantage. The fact the Adobe has now designed their software to produce an HDR (or pano) in a RAW file is a winner. Still plenty of scope to work with.

As far as getting a result from, as you put it "in which case you could have probably have got the same result from a single well exposed raw", well that might apply to large sensor DSLR's but from 1" sensors you just don't have the latitude without introducing shadow noise.

I don't feel like reading the whole thread, has anyone mentioned AEB?

 

[noosaguy]

I don't feel like reading the whole thread, has anyone mentioned AEB?

Yes Don (Lon?), I actually included a sequence of images to demonstrate. The thing is, as I mentioned, the deal changer for me was when Adobe allowed HDR and pano sequences to be produced in RAW. Yahoo!

 

[Lon Denard]

Yes Don (Lon?), I actually included a sequence of images to demonstrate. The thing is, as I mentioned, the deal changer for me was when Adobe allowed HDR and pano sequences to be produced in RAW. Yahoo!

Cool. When you quote my comment, it includes my name... I really don't understand the confusion.

 

[noosaguy]

Cool. When you quote my comment, it includes my name... I really don't understand the confusion.

Sorry mate, i suspected you'd transposed the first letter of your names for anonymity. Don't know why I thought that .

 

[Lon Denard]

Sorry mate, i suspected you'd transposed the first letter of your names for anonymity. Don't know why I thought that .

Nope, I'm not afraid to be myself on the internet.

 

[noosaguy]

Nope, I'm not afraid to be myself on the internet.

 

[kilomikebravo]

i suspected you'd transposed the first letter of your names for anonymity.

Noosa: <laughing> I did the same thing a few months ago...sorry, Lon.

KB

 

[noosaguy]

Noosa: <laughing> I did the same thing a few months ago...sorry, Lon.
KB

I apologise too Lon.

 

[thegronz]

It’s a bear getting a grip but wipe your hands dry and grab only the lens filter and twist pop! Like opening a tight jar. Remember the position of the large slot on the filter cap and gently wiggle it back on. It will always be a b*tch but be gentle so you don’t strip the holders.

I bought some filters $80 which screwed my photos up. I got double barrel distortion so I to the ND filter off and my camera shoots great. I don’t think I need them with the Mavic 2 camera.

 

[kilomikebravo]

I don’t think I need them with the Mavic 2 camera.

Gronz: Most people believe that ND filters are essential for daytime video in order to keep the correct shutter speed and still be able to use the sweet spot region for aperture adjustment.

For still photography, the same issue can be corrected by simply increasing the shutter speed. Stills don’t suffer from higher shutter speeds but videos definitely do.

KB