ND filter comparison Shots

[mavin]

I did a series of 3 picture comparison shots using all 6 of my filters. About the same distance and height on each. All shot on Auto mode.

ND 4PL,8PL and 16PL {polarized)
ND 8,16,32

shot number 3 of a treeline is attached, titled with each type of filter

I only see a real different with the ND32, maybe I'm just old and half blind

 

[sonof40]

I believe (which means I could be totally wrong,) that filters are used for video to allow motion blur.
I don't use them for stills.

 

[Porky]

Interesting, thanks for sharing ?

 

[Porky]

I believe (which means I could be totally wrong,) that filters are used for video to allow motion blur.
I don't use them for stills.

You’re right but people do still use them for photography with their drones?

I use grad Nd filters for sunrise/set photos

 

[nomadme]

ND filters are used for controlling the exposure to allow higher aperture to be used.

If you use it with AUTO mode, then you might not see the difference.

The PL(Polarized) version of the ND filter will remove glare and haze and tone down harsh lights. Specially very useful if there are items (body of water, windows, metal surfaces) that are reflecting or bouncing light back from the light source. On your images, if you have included sky with cloud, you would see the difference much easier. And I see there is one image with bit of cloud, and I can see the cloud more in that photo with PL on.

 

[Thomas B]

Agree, if used in auto mode the drone camera will compensate. I use manual settings to get filter effects.

 

[mavin]

I believe (which means I could be totally wrong,) that filters are used for video to allow motion blur.
I don't use them for stills.

No idea I got the set with a second MP from a friend. First time is years I opened them

 

[mavin]

ND filters are used for controlling the exposure to allow higher aperture to be used.

If you use it with AUTO mode, then you might not see the difference.

The PL(Polarized) version of the ND filter will remove glare and haze and tone down harsh lights. Specially very useful if there are items (body of water, windows, metal surfaces) that are reflecting or bouncing light back from the light source. On your images, if you have included sky with cloud, you would see the difference much easier. And I see there is one image with bit of cloud, and I can see the cloud more in that photo with PL on.

Good to know, thanks

 

[Porky]

@mavin sorry forgot to say, nice photos btw?

 

[brett8883]

I did a series of 3 picture comparison shots using all 6 of my filters. About the same distance and height on each. All shot on Auto mode.

ND 4PL,8PL and 16PL {polarized)
ND 8,16,32

shot number 3 of a treeline is attached, titled with each type of filter

I only see a real different with the ND32, maybe I'm just old and half blind

You shouldn’t see any difference between ND filters in still shots, if you do it means you have bad filters. However in this case because some are polarized and some aren’t you will get some variation depending on the polarization angle relative to the sun

 

[dkuhne]

You shouldn’t see any difference between ND filters in still shots, if you do it means you have bad filters. However in this case because some are polarized and some aren’t you will get some variation depending on the polarization angle relative to the sun

You absolutely WOULD see a difference in your photo’s using a ND filter, if your ISO and shutter speed was kept constant.

Change your photo settings to manual, keep the iso at 100, and shutter speed at whatever time keeps the histogram looking sensible, and test these again, and you’ll see a big difference.

The amount of light hitting your magic Air sensor is dictated by ISO, shutter speed and aperture. Aperture is fixed on the air, and you don’t really want to use a ISO above 100, because you’ll get a lot of noise in your shot. So the only thing you can change is shutter speed.

By shooting your photos in auto, your mavic air is changing the shutter speed and ISO to what IT THINKS is best, for the situation.

 

[dkuhne]

You absolutely WOULD see a difference in your photo’s using a ND filter, if your ISO and shutter speed was kept constant.

Change your photo settings to manual, keep the iso at 100, and shutter speed at whatever time keeps the histogram looking sensible, and test these again, and you’ll see a big difference.

The amount of light hitting your magic Air sensor is dictated by ISO, shutter speed and aperture. Aperture is fixed on the air, and you don’t really want to use a ISO above 100, because you’ll get a lot of noise in your shot. So the only thing you can change is shutter speed.

By shooting your photos in auto, your mavic air is changing the shutter speed and ISO to what IT THINKS is best, for the situation.

Oh sorry, you’re using a pro, so you can change aperture, but the same logic applies.

 

[Meta4]

I did a series of 3 picture comparison shots using all 6 of my filters. About the same distance and height on each. All shot on Auto mode.

I only see a real different with the ND32

You absolutely WOULD see a difference in your photo’s using a ND filter, if your ISO and shutter speed was kept constant.

No ... the filter won't do anything to change to look of the picture.
It just cuts the amount of light reaching the sensor (by a lot) which forces a longer shutter speed to get proper exposure.
But it doesn't change the image qualities.
Unless you have a particular reason to want to force a longer shutter speed, there is no reason to use ND filters for shooting stills from a drone.

 

[dkuhne]

No ... the filter won't do anything to change to look of the picture.
It just cuts the amount of light reaching the sensor (by a lot) which forces a longer shutter speed to get proper exposure.
But it doesn't change the image qualities.
Unless you have a particular reason to want to force a longer shutter speed, there is no reason to use ND filters for shooting stills from a drone.

Obviously ND filters don’t magically increase the ‘quality’ of your shot, but they allow you to capture motion in still shots, for things like motion blur in waterfalls, ocean tides and car light trails:

The original poster says he ‘didn’t see a difference’, but that’s Becasue he was shooting in auto.

A change in the amount of light, has a profound effect on an image, so the answer is, yes they DO make a difference IMO

 

[Meta4]

Obviously ND filters don’t magically increase the ‘quality’ of your shot, but they allow you to capture motion in still shots, for things like motion blur in waterfalls, ocean tides and car light trails:

The original poster says he ‘didn’t see a difference’, but that’s Becasue he was shooting in auto.

A change in the amount of light, has a profound effect on an image, so the answer is, yes they DO make a difference IMO

All you are saying is that they force a longer shutter speed (which is agreeing with what I said above).
If you are photographing something static (like the OP did), the images would look the same.

 

[mavin]

You absolutely WOULD see a difference in your photo’s using a ND filter, if your ISO and shutter speed was kept constant.

Change your photo settings to manual, keep the iso at 100, and shutter speed at whatever time keeps the histogram looking sensible, and test these again, and you’ll see a big difference.

The amount of light hitting your magic Air sensor is dictated by ISO, shutter speed and aperture. Aperture is fixed on the air, and you don’t really want to use a ISO above 100, because you’ll get a lot of noise in your shot. So the only thing you can change is shutter speed.

By shooting your photos in auto, your mavic air is changing the shutter speed and ISO to what IT THINKS is best, for the situation.

Awesome thanks.
I'll go out and do the same 6 shots again on manual and see what happens

 

[Meta4]

Awesome thanks.
I'll go out and do the same 6 shots again on manual and see what happens

It won't make any difference

 

[HoozierDroneDaddy]

It won't make any difference

It will make a difference on his shutter speed as he will have to adjust it to get a good exposure. As he goes up on the ND his shutter speed will go down.

 

[Meta4]

It will make a difference on his shutter speed as he will have to adjust it to get a good exposure. As he goes up on the ND his shutter speed will go down.

That's obvious.
If you cut the light falling on the sensor, of course you have to leave the shutter open longer to get proper exposure.
That's already been said in several posts above.
But it still won't make any difference to the appearance of the images.

 

[Smokieflies]

Actually, it will not be much of a difference, but by using a ND for a still, the drone will open its aperture more, meaning less depth of field (foreground and background less sharp then the main area of focus). For portraits a good thing, blur
background makes main subject stand out more. For landscape probably a bad thing, since we usually want everything sharp. Lens on drones are pretty wide (ie wide angle), so that usually have good depth of field to begin with.