ND filter for both photo and video ? Or no ND filter at all

[laurent45]

Hi MM2 pilots
I am new with Mini 2 and watch lots of videos and read forums on ND filters.
From what I understood (and I might wrong..), ND filter are improving video, but not photo. Photo can be OK with no filter in AUTO mode and RAW, ND filter might even been counterproductive.
So all those watching and reading left confused, because I want in the same flight be able to shoot photo and videos, as I have not enough battery to land , remove filter, and then shoot photo.
So should I use no filter at all.
Or by a Freewell ND filter ND 8 or ND16 : if yes which one is better ND8 or ND16.
In fact if I can use a filter, I was thinking on leaving the filter always on the camera as a way to protect it.

Your help and feedback are needed.
Thanks in advance

 

[Dave Maine]

The ND filter is completely unnecessary for still pictures. For video, it is only useful if strobing from fast camera movements is causing strobing problems. In 3 years of flying, I have never had the need for it.

I own a set. The only filter from that set that I use is a circular polarizer which can be very helpful for both stills and video in the right lighting conditions.

 

[Meta4]

So should I use no filter at all.
Or by a Freewell ND filter ND 8 or ND16 : if yes which one is better ND8 or ND16.
In fact if I can use a filter, I was thinking on leaving the filter always on the camera as a way to protect it.

For video, what you should do is to test and see what works best for you and gives you the results that you like.
Try with and without in the same conditions and compare the results.

But it helps to understand what those ND filters do.
The ND 8 cuts out 87% of the light and the ND16 only lets 6% of the light through.
For drone stills, unless less you have a particular reason to want to force the camera to use a much slower shutter speed, there is nothing to be gained by using an ND filter.

 

[laurent45]

@Meta4, @Dave Maine Thank you so much for your feedback !!

 

[Cymruflyer]

The only use for an ND filter with still photography is to slow the shutter speed down so that any motion becomes blurred. Examples of why you might want this is to capture that blurred flowing look of water in a river shot where the scenery is sharp but the water has that milky flowing look, or to make a waterfall look flowing or maybe an evening shot at a sea side where you want the water to look milky as the waves rise up and down over a long exposure. Any other time, the last thing you want to do is have a slow shutter speed with still images.

So on a bright sunny day you may never be able to get a sufficiently slow shutter speed to get a waterfall or flowing river to look like it is a streak of flowing mass. Therefore, the only way to achieve that slow enough shutter, would be to reduce the light enough with an ND filter. With that said, you must have your camera on a very secure and stabile tripod though, to avoid any kind of camera movement, so as not to have anything else in your image blurred.

With a drone, you never really want that slow shutter speed with still images because it could make the rest of the image blurred as well. Thing of an ND filter only for video work and rarely for still images and almost never for a drone, due to its overall movement in the air while exposing an image. Sure there are times when it can make a good enough long exposure still image but in general you will be seeing some blur in long exposure still shots from a drone.

As for shooting both video and still in the same flight, then you need to determine what is more important to you. If video is and there is a need to use an ND filter for better video then do that and just take a frame out of the video for a still image. If, on the other hand, the stills will be more important, then don't use the ND filter and just do your best to adjust the video in post production when editing, to acceptable results. There is no perfect situation for video and still with a drone, if there was, we would all have that. As with anything in aviation and photography, there is a compromise and the photographer/pilot must make those decisions to work out the best compromise for your situation.

 

[EricJT]

The only use for an ND filter with still photography is to slow the shutter speed down so that any motion becomes blurred. Examples of why you might want this is to capture that blurred flowing look of water in a river shot where the scenery is sharp but the water has that milky flowing look, or to make a waterfall look flowing or maybe an evening shot at a sea side where you want the water to look milky as the waves rise up and down over a long exposure. Any other time, the last thing you want to do is have a slow shutter speed with still images.

So on a bright sunny day you may never be able to get a sufficiently slow shutter speed to get a waterfall or flowing river to look like it is a streak of flowing mass. Therefore, the only way to achieve that slow enough shutter, would be to reduce the light enough with an ND filter. With that said, you must have your camera on a very secure and stabile tripod though, to avoid any kind of camera movement, so as not to have anything else in your image blurred.

With a drone, you never really want that slow shutter speed with still images because it could make the rest of the image blurred as well. Thing of an ND filter only for video work and rarely for still images and almost never for a drone, due to its overall movement in the air while exposing an image. Sure there are times when it can make a good enough long exposure still image but in general you will be seeing some blur in long exposure still shots from a drone.

As for shooting both video and still in the same flight, then you need to determine what is more important to you. If video is and there is a need to use an ND filter for better video then do that and just take a frame out of the video for a still image. If, on the other hand, the stills will be more important, then don't use the ND filter and just do your best to adjust the video in post production when editing, to acceptable results. There is no perfect situation for video and still with a drone, if there was, we would all have that. As with anything in aviation and photography, there is a compromise and the photographer/pilot must make those decisions to work out the best compromise for your situation.

I use a variable ND filter.....I set it to "0" for stills and shoot in aperture priority, ISO 100 and shutter speed auto.....for video I set the ND filter to get 2x the inverse of the Fps (i. e. 30FPS with a shutter speed of 1/60).

The variable ND filter is adjustable to get the optimal EV without having to swap out individual filters. I just find this approach easier than messing with multiple filters....I have a tremor that makes it w wise not to mess with the camera/gimbal too much.

 

[Cymruflyer]

I use a variable ND filter.....I set it to "0" for stills and shoot in aperture priority, ISO 100 and shutter speed auto.....for video I set the ND filter to get 2x the inverse of the Fps (i. e. 30FPS with a shutter speed of 1/60).

The variable ND filter is adjustable to get the optimal EV without having to swap out individual filters. I just find this approach easier than messing with multiple filters....I have a tremor that makes it w wise not to mess with the camera/gimbal too much.

That is the best way for you to handle the situation, I'm sure. If you could remove the variable ND filter, that would be better due to a few reasons. For 1 it is always better not to have more glass in front of the lens than absolutely necessary because you will be degrading the quality, the more unnecessary filters you have on your lens. A variable ND is basically two polarizing filters that are turning opposite to each other.

Number 2, unless your filter is the one that is in the $280 minimum range then it is of not really great quality and there will be some loss of image quality with such a filter, compared to no filter and the lower cost variables do not give an even light reduction.. Understandably, in your case, you have little option. However, for others who can change filters, it is best not to have one on if you don't really need one.

The other thing to bear in mind is that a variable filter is more weight and even a single can be a bit of a struggle for the gimbal in certain weather/wind conditions. Adding weight can cause a gimbal issue over time.

 

[sigi.stiemer]

I usually do not use any filters when taking photos with a camera. However, having the camera attached to the drone, accidental damage is more likely than with a handheld camera. A filter - any filter ND or polarizing or clear - may be good for protecting the lens. I got a combination ND4/PL filter (by Neewer) always attached to my drone. Replacing a messed-up filter is cheaper than a new gimbal camera.

 

[Meta4]

I usually do not use any filters when taking photos with a camera. However, having the camera attached to the drone, accidental damage is more likely than with a handheld camera. A filter - any filter ND or polarizing or clear - may be good for protecting the lens. I got a combination ND4/PL filter (by Neewer) always attached to my drone. Replacing a messed-up filter is cheaper than a new gimbal camera.

Clear UV filters are available and would be a much better choice for stills photography.
The ND4 cuts 75% of the light before it gets to your sensor.

 

[Cymruflyer]

I usually do not use any filters when taking photos with a camera. However, having the camera attached to the drone, accidental damage is more likely than with a handheld camera. A filter - any filter ND or polarizing or clear - may be good for protecting the lens. I got a combination ND4/PL filter (by Neewer) always attached to my drone. Replacing a messed-up filter is cheaper than a new gimbal camera.

If you get a messed up filter on your drone, then I'm sure you will have done damage to the gimbal as well in what ever caused the mess up to your filter. I don't see a situation that would have damaged your lens but left the camera and gimbal in perfect condition. Therefore, it might be false security covering up a good camera with a filter when not really needed.

 

[RogerDH]

.....for video I set the ND filter to get 2x the inverse of the Fps (i. e. 30FPS with a shutter speed of 1/60).
...

I'm feeling a little curmudgeonly this morning, so... It's always bugged me that virtually everyone says something like, "For cinematic video, the shutter speed should be twice the frame rate." Your statement that it should be twice the inverse is closer, but still not accurate. Expressed in the same units, 30 frames per second is 1/30th second per frame, and a shutter speed of 1/60th second per frame is half that rate, not twice. Or, if you prefer, the frame rate is twice the shutter speed -- exactly the opposite of the way it's usually described. The reason it bugs me is that correctly stating it makes it more obvious what's happening: The shutter is open half the time, like a standard movie camera, so motion blurs are half the total distance an object moves from one frame to the next.

But as I said, I'm feeling a little curmudgeonly this morning, so carry on.

 

[sigi.stiemer]

If you get a messed up filter on your drone, then I'm sure you will have done damage to the gimbal as well in what ever caused the mess up to your filter. I don't see a situation that would have damaged your lens but left the camera and gimbal in perfect condition. Therefore, it might be false security covering up a good camera with a filter when not really needed.

You might be right. I'll do some comparative testing in the next few days to see which gives me more pleasant images, with or without ND/PL filter. I just need to remember to be more careful (no touching) in handling the camera and gimbal when without a filter.

 

[sigi.stiemer]

You might be right. I'll do some comparative testing in the next few days to see which gives me more pleasant images, with or without ND/PL filter. I just need to remember to be more careful (no touching) in handling the camera and gimbal when without a filter.

I have done a simple comparison of photo and video with a Mavic Air 2 on a sunny day in the Pacific Northwest using both no filter and then a 4ND/PL filter. My observations are as follows: Photo: PL filter causes better definition, ND longer exposure times, and less contrast. Video: the same. The claim that the ND filter creates a smoother video appearance at 30 fps is a myth (or I need better glasses). It is much better to take videos at 60 fps and render your edited video at the same rate.
Summary: I will use the 4 ND/PL filter only on days when I want to enhance the clouds and sky - otherwise, it will be no filter and 60 fps all the way. For high contrast scenes, the photo mode of "SmartPhoto" is advantageous.
Please note that the above findings are my personal impressions, and not based on scientific measurement. You might experience the filter effects different.

 

[RogerDH]

I have done a simple comparison of photo and video with a Mavic Air 2 on a sunny day in the Pacific Northwest using both no filter and then a 4ND/PL filter. My observations are as follows: Photo: PL filter causes better definition, ND longer exposure times, and less contrast. Video: the same. The claim that the ND filter creates a smoother video appearance at 30 fps is a myth (or I need better glasses). It is much better to take videos at 60 fps and render your edited video at the same rate.
Summary: I will use the 4 ND/PL filter only on days when I want to enhance the clouds and sky - otherwise, it will be no filter and 60 fps all the way. For high contrast scenes, the photo mode of "SmartPhoto" is advantageous.
Please note that the above findings are my personal impressions, and not based on scientific measurement. You might experience the filter effects different.

To my eyes, the motion-smoothing effect of using ND filters is really only apparent when you have a relatively fast moving object, and it's most noticeable against a stationary background that stays in focus. I believe that probably comes up a lot for videographers actually shooting "movies" with digital cameras, but for drone videos, about the only time it makes any difference is when you're flying very close to things. At altitude, it would probably make a rapid yaw look smoother, but only if the yaw was too fast to be considered "cinematic" anyway. So, ND filters are not a myth, IMO, but expecting them to magically make drone videos "cinematic" is wishful thinking.

 

[sigi.stiemer]

To my eyes, the motion-smoothing effect of using ND filters is really only apparent when you have a relatively fast moving object, and it's most noticeable against a stationary background that stays in focus. I believe that probably comes up a lot for videographers actually shooting "movies" with digital cameras, but for drone videos, about the only time it makes any difference is when you're flying very close to things. At altitude, it would probably make a rapid yaw look smoother, but only if the yaw was too fast to be considered "cinematic" anyway. So, ND filters are not a myth, IMO, but expecting them to magically make drone videos "cinematic" is wishful thinking.

... o.k., not a myth, but wishful thinking then. Arrgh, it's always the desire to get more accessories ...