urgent query...

is this worth buying for my camera..?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=23780&item=7526630336&rd=1

it runs out very soon...

 

Not desperately.... If you're going to buy filters there's no point unless you buy the best multi-coated filters. Others will give you a pretty poor image. Diffusion filter is pretty pointless (use gaussian blur in photoshop if you must). UV is essentially a protect. Polariser.... if you're going to use one (I don't) then buy a good one... that doesn't say whether it is linear or circular (you want a circular).

 

ok cheers....just that the other I'd seen very expensive (with justification, most likely...)...well, you get what you pay for!

 

well, I couldn;t resist and I bought them...well, they were cheap and I can see what they're like...the sellers feedback seems good too!

 

I know it is a bit late to offer advice but I'd go along with what Isaac has said and that quite a lot can now be done in photoshop, gimp or whatever but every now and then I make use of Neutral Density Filters (times 2 & 4 alone and in combination) for something special. I made extensive use of them one year on holiday when it was very sunny and I used them to cut the light entering the camera so widening the apature and as a result decreasing the depth of focus. I also use them to allow long exposures (slightly artistic snaps of moving water, flowers, people ect) on very bright days in conjunction with a tripod.

Anyway it looks like you now have some nice new toys to play with this weekend.

 

Good luck with them... they should be fine for experimenting and as a test as to whether it's worth spending on some "proper" ones.

 

yeah, at least I should be able to test to see if the overall effect is what I'm after...I don't expect miracles...but I do categorise myself as being a purist - as in I seldom manipulate images using software...it's even a first using filters..!!

 

Software post-processing is an essential part of digital photography... it's not about "purism"... It's about extracting the best from imperfect technology. For example, digital cameras (except for the Kodak DCS14n, SLR/n, SLR/c and the Sigma SD9 and SD10) have something called an anti-alias filter in front of their sensors. This is to prevent spurious effects above the nyquist limit of the sensor due to bayer interpolation (eg Moire) by blurring the image slightly.Thus the image is not as sharp as it could be... point and shoot cameras then use a software sharpening algorithm before they save the image, whereas dslrs don't (because the sharpening can be unpleasant and it can be unecessary), or at least they allow you to choose how much sharpening is applied in-camera.

Then there's the fact that no matter how good your camera, the dynamic range and white balancing will not be perfect nor as good as possible, so these things may well need tweaking to get the best of the image. Using PS to merge two images in order to expand dynamic range (by bracketing the images as they're taken and merging) is every bit as valid an approach as using a graduated ND is in the field, or dodge/burn is in the darkroom.

An example is that out of the camera this image was of several black objects against a very light grey sky above some black trees. Careful post-processing gave:



A little more work is needed on noise reduction on the trees, but it's not bad...

 

yeah, I know what you're saying there...just that with my old fuljifilm point and click - I was generally happy with the results - especially with landscapes, but I need to practise more with my new camera to achieve the same kind of shots...

I suppose I need to be re-eductaed on this kind of thing...!