ND Filter for Photos

[CanadaDrone]

Those hypothetical scenarios are all too contrived.
I'll be generous and consider them as specialised shots.
If you can't get by with a shutter speed of 1/8000th, maybe you need to lower your ISO setting, stop down a little and point your camera away from the sun.

They are very real scenarios and not hypothetical. I literally use them myself, and provided commonly used examples. Again, just because your personal usage does not cross into that territory, it does not mean nobody else would get value from it.

Read my post again - ISO 100 is what you would always use, and you can hardly stop down at all before diffraction becomes a much bigger problem than simply adding a ND filter, so adding the ND filter would be preferable to stopping down beyond F4 if you are concerned about maximum image quality. If you don't care that the image softens, go nuts and stop down to F8 or F11 so you can forget about the ND filters - there is absolutely nothing wrong with that either so long as you understand the compromise.

The assertion was made that you would never run into a scenario like this. I provided examples (both with and without a drone) that apply, including scenarios I have personally run into. All I am saying is there is value in shutter speeds faster than 1/8000 for those times you need it. There are mainstream cameras on the market that offer 1/32000 and people are very happy to have that because it dramatically reduces or eliminates the need for ND filters in most scenarios that would otherwise require it. You may never need it, but I do, so I am glad to have ND's even for stills.

 

[gnirtS]

What if I wanted that little bit of subject isolation?

Then still wont get it. Do the maths, on a small mavic pro sensor if your subject is over about 1.6m you're at infinity. You simply cant get depth of field subject isolation on the wide focal length. Unless you're hovering your drone within an arms length of your subject you have no scope at all for any blur or isolation.

What if my particular drone was sharpest at F2.8?

Then use f2.8. As you still wont get anywhere near exceeding 1/8000th.

 

[CanadaDrone]

Then use f2.8. As you still wont get anywhere near exceeding 1/8000th.

I am sorry but this is simply not true. As I have explained twice now, I have personally been in situations where F2.8 would exceed 1/8000 at ISO 100 and they aren't that extreme - e.g. glare over water or sun-lit snow. A third scenario I have run into is getting a certain exposure of a sunset, where you are essentially shooting directly into the sun, albeit a falling one. You seem to think that just because you personally have never run into the situation, nobody has - it's fine that you don't need it, but there are absolutely scenarios that require it. It should not bother you that some people have been in situations that you have not - that is part of the fun of learning as a community. I can't understand why you are so vehemently defending something just because you personally have not experienced it. Just accept that other people may have had different experiences than you - different people run into different scenarios, and there are tools available to deal with it. Everyone's happy.

 

[Meta4]

It should not bother you that some people have been in situations that you have not - that is part of the fun of learning as a community. I can't understand why you are so vehemently defending something just because you personally have not experienced it. Just accept that other people may have had different experiences than you - different people run into different scenarios, and there are tools available to deal with it. Everyone's happy.

Yes .. some people want to shoot full open inside an arc furnace.
But it's a pretty rare and extreme scenario.
In 40 years of all kinds of photography I don't think I've ever shot at over 1/2000th.
It's something that isn't going to ever be experienced by more than 1 in a thousand drone flyers (probably considerably less than that.)

Going into great detail about the most extreme situations for specialised techniques about a million miles from the OP's question.
There are a few people that use specialised techniques in unusual and extreme situations.
But for almost all drone flyers, almost all the time, there is no need to use ND filters when shooting stills.

 

[gnirtS]

Unless you're shooting a thermonuclear blast 1/8000 is going to be more than enough. Equatorial sun reflected off ocean? Nowhere near. Same sun reflected off bright marble? Nowhere near. Snow glare? Nowhere near.

About the only time i can think of someone using an ND is for long exposure water shots. But those typically require exposure times measured in seconds and the drone simply isn' stable enough to pull that off acceptably.

Ultimately, for photos you want a non blurred crisp image. For videos you want blur. They're total opposites. So NDs for video and not for stills. 99% of people using ND filters dont actually understand why they;re using them or what they do correctly.

 

[zocalo]

If the answer is that you are particularly wanting a very shallow depth of field, that doesn't translate to drone photography since the Mavic doesn't do shallow DoF.

Exceeding 1/8000s aside (which, I agree, is quite rare) the M2P can actually do shallow DoF reasonably well, all things considered. It does require a specific scenario - wanting a soft background and the primary subject being fairly close, but the technique is as follows:

1. Select a wide aperture
2. Focusing closer than the actual subject, but keeping the subject within the range of acceptable sharpness for the chosen aperture and focus point distance (the focus point must be closer than hyperfocal - e.g. only a few meters from the drone)
3. On rare occassions, an ND filter to avoid the use of higher ISOs

The results might not be as good as a DSLR, but they are still better/quicker than trying to apply a gaussian blur in a convincing manner. Also, you can then use that existing softening with an unsharp mask to apply further softening in post as well, achieving a much more natural looking effect to the finished image.

Blanket statements are always problematic around an art like photography because there's always a possibility that there is some technique or approach that you either don't know or care about that someone else does.

 

[Meta4]

Blanket statements are always problematic around an art like photography because there's always a possibility that there is some technique or approach that you either don't know or care about that someone else does.

Why all the references to blanket statements directed toward me?
This is not a blanket statement ......
for almost all drone flyers, almost all the time, there is no need to use ND filters when shooting stills
It allows for the special people that want to slow flowing water in daylight or any of the other uncommon and specialised techniques.
But for almost all drone flyers, almost all the time, there is no need to use ND filters when shooting stills.

 

[zocalo]

Why all the references to blanket statements directed toward me?

That bit wasn't specifically directed at you, although I did quote a blanket statement you did make in my post: "the Mavic doesn't do shallow DoF" as a lead in to a way to achieve it.

The point was more that the use of ND filters seems for stills seems to be a polarizing issue (if you'll excuse the pun), with some people saying there's either no place at all for them, or it's a very specific usage case that only a few people will ever use. The former is clearly not the case, and the close focussing approach I outlined isn't that hard to achieve either, so I expect the usage will become more common as pilots start to push the limits more. I dare say there are/will be other uses for using NDs that I'm not aware of yet as well besides the obvious example of smoothing water or other motion.

One photographer's niche, is another's bread and butter, basically.

 

[kilomikebravo]

Agreed, but you can handle this in post with near perfection in Lightroom.

My thinking is, once the highlights are blown, no NLE can bring it back. Do you agree?

 

[trriley5]

I use them all the time with spectacular results and minimal post editing. I live in NorCal with very bright sunny days. ND 32 is my go to filter. I also have a full range of others....

 

[SteveCA]

Can we agree that there are photographers that want to achieve a certain look that may need ND filters to accomplish that look? Photography is art and you may or may not like the art but others might. Here is a four second long shot. I used an ND filter to allow for longer light trails by the cars on the bridge while keeping my aperture in the sweet spot. Even at 4 seconds, the light trails are not as long as I prefer due to rush hour traffic.

 

[SteveCA]

Here is another photo shot with ND filters for effect. In this case I wanted the sense of movement in the water

 

[SteveCA]

I also use slow 1/2 second to 1 second long exposures in my hyperlapses to get that smooth dreamy cinematic effect. Slow shutter speeds for me open up a whole new creative universe of photographic options. Here is a hyperlapse compilation all of which was shot with slow shutter speeds, some using ND filters where necessary.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[SteveCA]

more slow shutter photography using ND filters.

 

[Ray Jay]

more slow shutter photography using ND filters.

Absoultely beautiful stuff, Mr. SteveCA. Clearly demonstrates the potential of the M2P in the right hands.

Ray Jay

 

[SteveCA]

Absoultely beautiful stuff, Mr. SteveCA. Clearly demonstrates the potential of the M2P in the right hands.

Ray Jay

Thanks Ray. I’m glad you enjoyed the photos. Some of these photos were shot with my DSLR’s so they are not all Mavic 2 pro photos. But the MP 2 Pro is plenty good enough for quality shots

 

[SteveCA]

Here are some Mavic shots that I feel would have benefited from a graduated ND filter which I did not have when I shot these.

 

[SteveCA]

That bit wasn't specifically directed at you, although I did quote a blanket statement you did make in my post: "the Mavic doesn't do shallow DoF" as a lead in to a way to achieve it.

The point was more that the use of ND filters seems for stills seems to be a polarizing issue (if you'll excuse the pun), with some people saying there's either no place at all for them, or it's a very specific usage case that only a few people will ever use. The former is clearly not the case, and the close focussing approach I outlined isn't that hard to achieve either, so I expect the usage will become more common as pilots start to push the limits more. I dare say there are/will be other uses for using NDs that I'm not aware of yet as well besides the obvious example of smoothing water or other motion.

One photographer's niche, is another's bread and butter, basically.

You are right on point. There are a bunch of still yet to be discovered creative techniques enabled by these amazing drones. I for one will always keep an open mind because “you don’t know what you don’t know”. This is a quote from my Dad and it has stuck with me for life.

In the world of photography, it is particularly pertinent!

 

[offtheback]

Agreed, but you can handle this in post with near perfection in Lightroom.

With a full frame or APS-C sensor on a DSLR you can often get away with lifting shadows+recovering highlights if your exposure was spot on and the scene dynamic range doesn't exceed the camera's sensor dynamic range.With the 1"sensor in the M2P less dynamic range is available so a Grad ND may be useful.All depends on what form final product is in(web,enlargement/large or small)

 

[SteveCA]

With a full frame or APS-C sensor on a DSLR you can often get away with lifting shadows+recovering highlights if your exposure was spot on and the scene dynamic range doesn't exceed the camera's sensor dynamic range.With the 1"sensor in the M2P less dynamic range is available so a Grad ND may be useful.All depends on what form final product is in(web,enlargement/large or small)

Yes a graduated ND, properly used can extend the dynamic range captured by the one inch sensor. The sensor seems to have around 12 stops of DR. With a 3 stop graduated ND, you can capture 15 stops of light in one shot.