Your Mavic lens has more depth of field than you know what to do with ... at any aperture.
DoF is not a factor you'll ever have to deal with unless you get down to within two metres of your subject.
ND filter comparison Shots
- Thread starter mavin
- Start date
DoF is not a factor you'll ever have to deal with unless you get down to within two metres of your subject.
I recognize the OP is focusing on photos and some previous posters have mentioned video as the reason for ND filters, but here is a short, but concise explanation of why it is important in video shooting:
The 180-degree rule is a standard in the film industry, and it explains the relationship between shutter speed and frame rate when recording motion in the video. To mimic motion the same way the human eye experiences it in real life, the 180-degree rule states that shutter speed should be set to double your frame rate. The ND filters can help get the shutter speed down in brighter lighting conditions that would normally default above a shutter speed of 60 (for the Mavic shooting at 30 FPS) or 120 (at 60 FPS)
The 180-degree rule is a standard in the film industry, and it explains the relationship between shutter speed and frame rate when recording motion in the video. To mimic motion the same way the human eye experiences it in real life, the 180-degree rule states that shutter speed should be set to double your frame rate. The ND filters can help get the shutter speed down in brighter lighting conditions that would normally default above a shutter speed of 60 (for the Mavic shooting at 30 FPS) or 120 (at 60 FPS)
Changing the aperture to compensate for exposure will have an effective on the depth of field, I always shoot at f2.8 for the shallowest depth of field, the only way to cut the light down without a filter would be to increase the shutter speed, if this is a problem for other reasons i.e very strobe shots if you were shooting something moving like a waterfall then you would need a filter rather than using the shutter. I also read somewhere that the Mavic 2 Pro camera was not as good at f11 and more closed apertures in which case a filter is better. I would suggest a better subject to shoot to compare would be something moving rather than a static landscape !
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2019
- Messages
- 1,436
- Reactions
- 1,188
Graduated ND filters are a different thing (and useful for still photos, though I haven't used my DSLR GNDs in years).
But he's using normal NDs on non-moving objects (no waterfalls, etc.).
I agree with Meta: redoing this test in manual mode won't show a difference, short of motion-blurred waterfall type shots.
I really have never seen anyone take a close up portrait with a drone, so that application of using an ND filter top open the aperture doesn't really apply as far as I know -- someone can feel free to post examples to the contrary though. Besides, even though the M2P has adjustable aperture, most of us have learned to keep it under f5.6 anyway.
To the OP: your filters are still useful for video though -- ask us how!
NOTE: the ND filters could also be useful for slowing down shutter speed in hyperlapse sequences, giving it motion blur to help keep the final video from being too jittery (especially if you use the in-Mavic compiled video rather than creating your own with the DNGs). But that's not really analogous to basic still photography either.
Chris
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2019
- Messages
- 1,436
- Reactions
- 1,188
Just a quibble, and I could be entirely wrong, about this part:
I thought it was to mimic the motion of classic film at a slow frame rate, typically around 24fps (which was chosen back in the day as a compromise / balance for technical reasons, like the capability of cameras and film speed, as well as later audio recording considerations), which gave a motion blur that we're accustom to and therefore find more pleasing to the eye.
I never thought that the human eye was limited to that speed. We can certainly observe the non-motion-blur in 60 or 120fps video. A lot of people don't like it because it's hyper-real. being used to the slower FPS.
Yes? No?
Chris
Fully aware of the differences and yes I did know he was using standard ND filters, thanks for quoting me though
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2019
- Messages
- 1,436
- Reactions
- 1,188
Okay. But I was commenting for the OP's benefit, not yours.
I quoted you because you brought 'graduated' ND filters into the conversation, which I thought could use some differentiation, since you didn't.
I'm only participating in this conversation for the reasons these forums exist. A user asked a question and is getting a conversation out of it. I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers.
Chris
Nope, you definitely didn’t ruffle my feathers in the slightest, you made a good point.?
amatog76
New Member
When filming video, ND Filters also allow you to manually set your shutter speed to twice the video frame rate (eg. 25fps would equate to 1/50 sec shutter speed). This is the 180 degree shutter angle rule. Shooting using this 'rule' allows you to achieve more natural motion in your video.
Sigh... no. What lets you adjust your shutter speed is manual shutter control. All an ND filter does is limit the amount of light passing through, which allows you to either 1. set longer shutter in manual mode, or 2. cheat the auto mode to set longer exposure, without overexposing the shot. And no, there's nothing "natural" about choppy 25fps garbage, it's just what your typical consumer is used to looking at because they've been looking at it for their entire life, because Hollywood is stuck using a hundred year old film techniques.
That applies to longer lenses on your SLR but not for your drone camera.
Read post #21
CentralVAphoto
Active Member
To the OP: if you don't shoot in manual (vs. auto or Program modes), ND, or Neutral Density filters are not for you. Those of us who shoot in manual or creative modes, use ND filters to allow us to set lower shutter speeds when our ISO is already as low as it will go and the aperture as small as it will go. This normally only happens in bright daylight-like conditions for most cameras and lenses. There are many creative uses for a slower shutter speed in still photography. People have mentioned waterfalls, fountains, rivers, but those are just the textbook examples. If you are flying co-speed with a subject (runner, car, boat, plane, etc.) and set a shutter speed less than your focal length reciprocal, you will get a blurred background that imparts motion to the subject, which is otherwise frozen in space. If you are shooting anything spinning, like a wind turbine or helicopter rotor, you need a slower shutter speed to see the spin blur. Image exposure is determined by the exposure triangle: Shutter speed, aperture and ISO. Each affects the others. So you could also use ND filters to set a wide open aperture when the camera's shutter speed is maxed out with the ISO at its lowest setting. That's probably less useful for aerial stills, but I can think of plenty of applications for that too. In short, ND filters are light limiting tools to help photographers beat the inherent limitations of the exposure triangle and do things that just can't be done otherwise, when there is too much light and too little wiggle in the lens limits. I'm a commercial photographer and own a few ND filters for a single DSLR lens. I wouldn't buy them for my sUAS (or anything else) unless a job was going to pay for them. That's how rarely I need ND filters. Graduated filters and polarizers? That's a whole 'nother story.
Hope that helps.
Hope that helps.
I've been a photographer for over 50 years, many as a professional. So, what I write is from that perspective.
Ideally, an ND (neutral density) filter will subtract light evenly across the spectrum in the amount specified by its rating and do nothing else, but this is never exactly true. ND filters, ideally are color neutral--it's in its name, Neutral Density--but this is seldom the case. Critical testing shows uneven transmission qualities in many if not all of them which alters the color of the original scene to some degree.
Any filter, all filters degrade image sharpness to some degree. It my not always or often be noticeable, but it's a fact.
There are various reasons why a photographer or videographer may wish to use a neutral density filter to reduce the brightness of a scene. Cutting out light allows the use of a wider aperture, longer shutter speed, or both.
Wider apertures produce a shallower depth of field which can be used creatively, blurring the foreground or the background, for example. Of course most of the drones we're familiar with here have no aperture control, the Mavic 2 Pro being an exception.
Longer shutter speeds allow for the motion blur favored by videographers when there is too much light, and there are times still photographers use blur creatively as well, blurring a runner, race car or waterfall for example.
Like any other tool available to photographers or videographers, in the hands of a skilled craftsman ND filters represent another arrow in the quiver of creativity. If a person doesn't understand why or when to use an ND filter it's just another thing to trip over.
Ideally, an ND (neutral density) filter will subtract light evenly across the spectrum in the amount specified by its rating and do nothing else, but this is never exactly true. ND filters, ideally are color neutral--it's in its name, Neutral Density--but this is seldom the case. Critical testing shows uneven transmission qualities in many if not all of them which alters the color of the original scene to some degree.
Any filter, all filters degrade image sharpness to some degree. It my not always or often be noticeable, but it's a fact.
There are various reasons why a photographer or videographer may wish to use a neutral density filter to reduce the brightness of a scene. Cutting out light allows the use of a wider aperture, longer shutter speed, or both.
Wider apertures produce a shallower depth of field which can be used creatively, blurring the foreground or the background, for example. Of course most of the drones we're familiar with here have no aperture control, the Mavic 2 Pro being an exception.
Longer shutter speeds allow for the motion blur favored by videographers when there is too much light, and there are times still photographers use blur creatively as well, blurring a runner, race car or waterfall for example.
Like any other tool available to photographers or videographers, in the hands of a skilled craftsman ND filters represent another arrow in the quiver of creativity. If a person doesn't understand why or when to use an ND filter it's just another thing to trip over.
What was mentioned in post 21 is that DoF becomes more of an issue at close focusing distances. Factually, DoF applies to all lenses although with wide angle lenses the apparent depth of field seems greater in more distant shots.
Image magnification plays a role here. If you were to photograph an object with a wide angle lens making it a certain size in the viewfinder or on screen and then repeat the process with a telephoto lens, given the same aperture in each case the DoF would be approximately the same.
For anybody who wants to hurt their brain about DoF there is a more in depth discussion here:
Depth of field - Wikipedia
I'm not sure why so many want to bring up depth of field since it just isn't an issue with drone photography.
I'd like someone to show me an example of their drone photography where it mattered.
If anyone can, it will be with the subject within 2 metres of the lens ... something that's very uncommon in drone shots.
Whether or not DoF is an issue with drone photography may have to do with the videographer and the cinematic techniques he or she employs. I say that as a rank amateur when it comes to videography, but even with my little Mavic 2 Zoom and my novice status I can see some small potential for controlling a viewer's attention in certain, limited applications. The potential might even be greater with the M2 Pro's variable aperture which effects DoF or while employing the zoom function of the M2 Zoom.
I am reminded of movies I have seen where a scene opens with something in the foreground in sharp focus with the background being all blurry. Then the focus is rolled to the background while the foreground goes blurry and the viewer's attention is shifted to the now sharp background.
I would not argue about the M2 Zoom's limitations here compared to cameras used in the movie industry, but despite these limitations I can see that in the hands of a skilled operator there may be some potential for utilizing focus and DoF to creative effect with the Zoom.
Here is a short, badly done example, perhaps, but it does show some ability to influence the viewers' attention via focus and DoF. The frame opens with my hand and controller in focus then shifts to the background. A skilled operator might be able to employ this effect better than I. Concerning oneself with DoF in drone photography may be "uncommon" as you put it, but even so, right or wrong, I see some potential for using DoF and focus to good effect.
Update: 6/9/19 3:10 PM PDT, I replaced the video clip I originally referenced with the one below which is larger in size and a few seconds longer which makes it easier to see the effect.
Last edited:
Since your video is not available we can only guess what it shows.
But you gave a clue that it was focusing on your hand and controller.
The thing about drone photography is that it's usually done from an elevated position that's quite some distance from the subject being shown.
It's possible but very rare that the drone is used to shoot anything quite close to the camera.
And for most drone cameras, (one more time because the message isn't getting through) if your subject is more than 1-2 metres from the lens, DoF doesn't matter because the lens has so much depth of field at any aperture.
The short zoom lens of the Mavic 2 Zoom would show a shallower DoF at longer focal lengths, but there's not much the user can do with this as the lens has a fixed aperture.
Sorry about the video not being available. I thought it was. Managing the settings on YouTube has been a real struggle for me. I think it should be available now.
I think we are in agreement. One thing we may wish to acknowledge here is that you have been writing about what is usual whereas I have been writing about what is unusual.
I'm uncertain to whom you are speaking when you write "(one more time because the message isn't getting through)". If that comment is intended for me you needn't worry. I understand. i believe I have a pretty good grasp of DoF vis-a-vis aperture, vis-a-vis image magnification and focal length. Although I am new to videography I have over 50 years experience as a photographer and shooting vistas or from mountaintops is not so dissimilar to shooting from the air. The principles of optics are the same across the board.
I do understand that most drone photography and videography is done from the air and some distance from the subject matter where DoF will play an insignificant role, but I was not writing about those situations. What I wrote was "I can see some small potential for controlling a viewer's attention in certain, limited applications". For example, think of a reveal where a drone is close to trees and as it rises above the treetops a city appears in the background but it is blurry; then the focus is rolled out to bring the cityscape into focus. Again it appears you have been writing about what is usual whereas I have been writing about what is unusual. You have been writing about when the subject is more than a couple meters from the lens. I have been writing about when it isn't.
If you use same exposure settings (Time, Aperture and ISO) and flip between the filters you will see dramatic difference. If you start with no filter and set exposure setting to this light condition than take a photo witn each of ND filter from smallest to largest the photos taken will get darker and darker.
You don't even need to fly to test it, you can do it on the ground.
The other test you can do is put your drone in AUTO EXPOSURE mode and face your camera towards a road with moving cars, during the dust / blue hour time, or even a pedestrians area with people walking by. You will see than higher the ND filter, the more blurry moving object will be, while all the surrounding will stay still. Again you can do the test from the ground, no need to fly. To see the above effect you need to do it in relatively low light conditions so you can reach 1 second or longer exposure for ND 16.
You don't even need to fly to test it, you can do it on the ground.
The other test you can do is put your drone in AUTO EXPOSURE mode and face your camera towards a road with moving cars, during the dust / blue hour time, or even a pedestrians area with people walking by. You will see than higher the ND filter, the more blurry moving object will be, while all the surrounding will stay still. Again you can do the test from the ground, no need to fly. To see the above effect you need to do it in relatively low light conditions so you can reach 1 second or longer exposure for ND 16.
It should not be a surprise that if you put a darker filter on the lens and make no change to the exposure .... the image looks darker.
That's just the same as leaving the ISO and aperture and adjusting the shutter speed.
But most people want their images to be properly exposed so they do change the settings to achieve proper exposure.
And using ND filters won't make the image look any different is you adjust for proper exposure.
QUOTE="Skry, post: 765522, member: 64361"]The other test you can do is put your drone in AUTO EXPOSURE mode and face your camera towards a road with moving cars, during the dust / blue hour time, or even a pedestrians area with people walking by. You will see than higher the ND filter, the more blurry moving object will be, while all the surrounding will stay still. Again you can do the test from the ground, no need to fly.[/QUOTE]
It's already been mentioned many times here that using an ND filter will force a slower shutter speed.
You're not saying anything new.
Here's something else that's been repeated here:
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.
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
New Threads
-
2 Pro Exploring the Fire Mine: Secret tunnels and dark arcades- Started by wind-up
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
Forum statistics
