Mini 2 Testing Skyreat 16ND filter for Mini-2

[Dale D]

I have had my newest drone, Mini-2 for about a week or two. I tried to outfit it to my needs, with a strobe and ND filters. The first set of Freewell ND8 and ND16 would not stay on the camera and I promptly returned them and got immediate Amazon refund.

I ordered a single Skyreat, the ND 16 and it came today so I went out to my driveway and shot two panos- one at 1 x magnification and one at 2 x. Both were processed in Photoshop by my usual technique which is to process the 4 DRG images with 30% overlap. Here are the results. I think the 1 x is sharper. I just could not get the 2x magnified image (which I like as a composition) to be as sharp. What do you think? BTW- the Skyreat snapped on and stayed on the first try! (double click for full screen).

 

[Prop Wash]

I like those @Dale D - Did you note how much your video settings changed from no filter to ND16? I think the sky detail is great.

 

[Dale D]

I like those @Dale D - Did you note how much your video settings changed from no filter to ND16?

Here it is, un-edited except for the 4 images stitched but the only edit was exposure (original was very dark).I think the sky detail is great. You can see it is really lacking details, sharpening, darker blue sky , brighter clouds, etc. I also burned in the buildings in the edited panos, but not here, so there are almost invisible.

Dale

 

[manc54]

Dale are the Skyreat filters labelled as Sunnylife ???

 

[Dale D]

Dale are the Skyreat filters labelled as Sunnylife ???

No- here it is in place after I used it for the above panoramas
www.skyreat.com- they don't show it for a stand alone single filter on the web site but I ordered a single filter from Amazon without difficulty.

Dale
Miami

 

[manc54]

I've just bought some sunnylife filters. Will be trying them at the weekend weather permitting.

 

[Chrislaf]

Just a quick inquiry - usually ND filters are used for video to get more cinematic shots and not often in stills photography unless you are trying to slow the shutter. Wondering why you would be using it for your pano as you could just adjust the shutter speed instead of using the filter?

Chris

 

[MARK (LI)]

Very nice pictures Dale..any reason in particular that you chose that one filter?

 

[vindibona1]

Thanks for the mini review of the Skyreat ND filter for the Mini 2. I haven't purchased any ND filters for it yet, but I think I really should. The thing is that any glass you put in front of your lens will typically degrade the image, even if marginally. I don't see the point of using ND filters for stills, though they are helpful if you desire cinematic motion blur for videos.

Skyreat is a good brand. I have a set for my Mavic 2 and did some exposure tests and as far a density levels they were right on the money.

 

[Dale D]

Just a quick inquiry - usually ND filters are used for video to get more cinematic shots and not often in stills photography unless you are trying to slow the shutter. Wondering why you would be using it for your pano as you could just adjust the shutter speed instead of using the filter?

Chris

You are indeed correct. I just opened the package from Amazon and wanted to test them. The day was extremely bright outside (as it often is here in South Miami). I didn't want to just fly and I cannot maintain VLOS for very long from my driveway because of the trees.- So I killed two birds with one stone- did a panorama and found out if the **** filter would fall off my drone or not(like the Freewell one did). It was a 5 minute up and down test from my driveway.

Dale

 

[manc54]

Well I liked the photos!!! ?

 

[Dale D]

Very nice pictures Dale..any reason in particular that you chose that one filter?

Although I have a full set of ND4,ND8,ND16, ND 32, ND 64 Polar Pro for my Mavic 2 Pro, I seem to always just leave the ND16 on and it seems to be my "go-to" filter. I only take it off for dawn, sunrise, and low light images. I have rarely, if ever, used the other 5 filters. So when it came to order an ND filter for the Mini 2 I tried out the ND 16 first before ordering any more that I might not use. For my purposes, it seems sufficient.

 

[DaveS]

a Polar Pro ND16w/PL, is also my go-to ND filter for video because of the bright Texas days here. I've played with the Polarizer feature but it never seems to work as well on video as on a photo because the drone is always moving on video so it seems to negate the effect of the PL. Definitely image one is sharper Dale. Is that not a function of when you shot in 2X magnification it crops the chip so you get less resolution working with fewer pixels?

 

[Dale D]

a Polar Pro ND16w/PL, is also my go-to ND filter for video because of the bright Texas days here. I've played with the Polarizer feature but it never seems to work as well on video as on a photo because the drone is always moving on video so it seems to negate the effect of the PL. Definitely image one is sharper Dale. Is that not a function of when you shot in 2X magnification it crops the chip so you get less resolution working with fewer pixels?

Dave:

I think it is less clear because it is a digital zoom and not an optical zoom. Optical zoom is a true zoom lens. Optical zoom is better than digital zoom . In digital zoom, the camera enlarges the pixels in the central area and I do believe it crops or removes pixels at the edges. If I am wrong, please correct me.

I ordered and tried a polarizer and got weird dark areas across my image. I never used it again.

Dale

 

[Karlewski]

I started out with a variable ND, tried all kinds ND strengths and I did get great motion blur flying fast and low but, honestly not worth the effort or the non uniform sky effect from a variable filter. So then I did the same as you Dale, only an nd 16 or nothing at all in low light, cloudy, real early. . . . Again, I'm not convinced that was really a very noticeable/worthy improvement, a bit more blur for rare low passes. Next trial, nd16 with PL, that I believe did slightly improve blur like before but, for my scenes, I think the Polarizer aspect is the best improvement. Flying over snow, water. . .even glare from rock and vegetation is often reduced substantially when angled properly to the sunlight. I am speculating that the PL reduction in glare also slightly reduces the overall exposure range by dimming reflective highlights areas, and reducing the overall dynamic range of these shots which is great for our little drone sensors with poor dynamic range to begin with. Very recently I flew my mini 2 with PL one trip and no PL filter the next. I liked the PL footage better, improved saturated colors, more detail in highlight/reflective areas. Since I generally fly all over the place searching for cool angles to reveal scale, get nice parallax. . . I always fly in auto mode. I hate wasting flight time/battery fiddling with camera settings while airborne as ambient exposures constantly change with quickly changing camera angles like orbits around a subject. . . . Not only am I searching for impressive angles and composition but also observing where the footage appears to be most attractive due to sun angle coupled with the auto settings and PL. Last thing, with so many airborne particles these days, especially smoke, I am quite sure the polarizer also reduces the haze associated to sunlight reflecting off that crap as well. . . I do remove my PL if I'm in low light. . . heavy clouds or sun rise/set trying to stop the auto setting from bumping up the ISO. . . Personally nd is not worth the effort for me. . . I rarely see/notice that jitter associated to the lack of motion blur and if it is real bad I suppose I could add blur in post anyway. . .
Way long winded, hope that helps!

PS never use digital zoom, you can alway zoom in post while better controlling you composition. The only reason I would even consider it. . . if I was searching for something, using it like magnifying glass. . . once found I'd go right back to 1x with 4k resolution. . .

 

[Dale D]

I started out with a variable ND, tried all kinds ND strengths and I did get great motion blur flying fast and low but, honestly not worth the effort or the non uniform sky effect from a variable filter. So then I did the same as you Dale, only an nd 16 or nothing at all in low light, cloudy, real early. . . . Again, I'm not convinced that was really a very noticeable/worthy improvement, a bit more blur for rare low passes. Next trial, nd16 with PL, that I believe did slightly improve blur like before but, for my scenes, I think the Polarizer aspect is the best improvement. Flying over snow, water. . .even glare from rock and vegetation is often reduced substantially when angled properly to the sunlight. I am speculating that the PL reduction in glare also slightly reduces the overall exposure range by dimming reflective highlights areas, and reducing the overall dynamic range of these shots which is great for our little drone sensors with poor dynamic range to begin with. Very recently I flew my mini 2 with PL one trip and no PL filter the next. I liked the PL footage better, improved saturated colors, more detail in highlight/reflective areas. Since I generally fly all over the place searching for cool angles to reveal scale, get nice parallax. . . I always fly in auto mode. I hate wasting flight time/battery fiddling with camera settings while airborne as ambient exposures constantly change with quickly changing camera angles like orbits around a subject. . . . Not only am I searching for impressive angles and composition but also observing where the footage appears to be most attractive due to sun angle coupled with the auto settings and PL. Last thing, with so many airborne particles these days, especially smoke, I am quite sure the polarizer also reduces the haze associated to sunlight reflecting off that crap as well. . . I do remove my PL if I'm in low light. . . heavy clouds or sun rise/set trying to stop the auto setting from bumping up the ISO. . . Personally nd is not worth the effort for me. . . I rarely see/notice that jitter associated to the lack of motion blur and if it is real bad I suppose I could add blur in post anyway. . .
Way long winded, hope that helps!

PS never use digital zoom, you can alway zoom in post while better controlling you composition. The only reason I would even consider it. . . if I was searching for something, using it like magnifying glass. . . once found I'd go right back to 1x with 4k resolution. . .

So we partially agree- forget the digital zoom- it's a gimmick, but we don't really agree on polarizers. The few times I put that darn polarizer on my lens I got crazy results- depending, of course, on the direction from the sun I was flying. It's great to reduce glare, but only if you fly in one direction at right angle to the sun. And there is no questioned it shuts down the light entering the lens and sensor. The way I have see you fly out and back, for sure you're gonna get big fluctuations in your lighting.

Dale

 

[Karlewski]

We must have different types, I guess. On both of my drones I've flown with little attention to orientation to the sunlight, per say, and all came out pretty well. Though I know you are correct on the 90 degree rule about polarizers, you are right. . . once i find the best looking orientation I do try to stick with it by limiting yaw moves. . . and mostly flying right stick for different perspectives. . . I do not know. . ? I was under the impression my best shots were more a function of keeping the sunlight from entering my camera sensor directly and avoiding shots with high dynamic range. If I feel I must shoot in a direction toward the sun and resulting shadowed side of a subjects, huge dynamic range shot, I often tilt the gimbal down as much as possible away from the sun without wrecking the composition. That way I have framed mostly shadow and reduced the dynamic range. At the end of the day I'd rather just get an air2 S and have a bad *** sensor with huge dynamic range and quit trying to compensate for the little wimpy sensor. still love the mini 2 though, just so light quick and easy, did an amazing job even at 14,500ft, cheap batteries too, I got a couple older heavier mini batteries I use when I'm at lower altitudes. . . Now you got me wondering, what're your "crazy results?"

The last 5 videos or more I've put out, my GoPro has always had a polarizer on there as well ??? I'm befuddled?
Somehow it has been coming out pretty well for me???

 

[Dale D]

Light or other electromagnetic radiation from many sources, such as the sun, consists of short wave trains with an equal mixture of polarizations; this is called unpolarized light.E.g:light is traveling in many directions (unpolarized). Polarized light can be produced by passing unpolarized light through a polarizing filter, which allows waves of only one polarization to pass through. So, as I am sure you already know, by changing the orientation of your filter, you can get a maximum and a minimum effect from the filter- from bright to dark, and from from no polarization to full polarization, where the image gets darker and all of the reflections are reduced. This change in orientation also occurs while flying in different directions from the light (the sun). When I used my polar pro polarizing flitter I had large dark blue areas on my image, especially if I tried a panorama. I had to take off the filter to get rid of it.

I just make it simple for myself. I leave the polarizing filter in my box unless I am only flying in one direction and if I am flying over water.

 

[jbierling]

Not to hijack this thread, but I just got the Skyreat six filter set and tried a test of the ND16.

Can anyone see a difference in this video?

 

[Dale D]

Not to hijack this thread, but I just got the Skyreat six filter set and tried a test of the ND16.

Can anyone see a difference in this video?

Call me dumb- but I see no difference. I use ND filters when the light is just too bright to shoot, and to create motion blur with moving objects. Of course, there are no moving objects in this this building or storefront.