Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Cameras, lenses and system accessories > Accessory talk

Accessory talk Those important extra system components.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 21st April 2009
Ellie Ellie is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SW Hants, UK
Posts: 2,382
Thanks: 62
Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Polarising filter - and a tripod?

I've just bought a polarising filter, I thought it would help keep some colour in the skies when the weather isn't behaving, and thought I'd check how to use it properly.

I found this site which has got me a bit worried, because it says
Quote:
The main side-effect of the polarizing filter is that it absorbs 1.5 stop of light. So, if you shoot at 1/180th of a second and then add the filter, you will find yourself at 1/60th of a second. This happens whatever the orientation for a polarizer. In low light situations, some type of camera support, such as a tripod, will be needed.
I have an E-400 and an E-1, that I'm still getting used to. Neither has IS.

I've got the three 'kit' lenses and was hoping to be able to use at least the 14-42mm and 40-150mm handheld at least f8 or f10.

Does anybody have any experience of using a polariser with these lenses and cameras?

Also, separate thing.

There's a formula of some sort or other in a thread that gives a rough guide for shutter speed suitable for handheld, but I can't find it.

I have to admit I didn't fully understand it either, because I couldn't see how it worked - because it changed all the time. Surely there has to be a tipping point, when handheld without IS is almost impossible?
__________________
- my pictures -
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 21st April 2009
photo_owl photo_owl is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kent
Posts: 1,423
Thanks: 37
Thanked 129 Times in 113 Posts
Likes: 55
Liked 53 Times in 42 Posts
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

Ellie

the formula is derived from 35m days as 1/focal length so for us it's 1/(2xfl) which gets you a reasonable target shutter speed.

I have a number of 58mm polarising filters but don't use them now - what I did use was a small leather bean bag and any handy support like a fence post and that was great as a really portable support in the field with the 400.
__________________
E, Pen and OM-D bodies
43 m43 and legacy glass
loads of flashes and accessories from all the systems
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 21st April 2009
Graham_of_Rainham's Avatar
Graham_of_Rainham Graham_of_Rainham is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Rainham
Posts: 8,129
Thanks: 643
Thanked 940 Times in 728 Posts
Likes: 2,276
Liked 1,580 Times in 910 Posts
Exclamation Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellie View Post
I've just bought a polarising filter, I thought it would help keep some colour in the skies when the weather isn't behaving, and thought I'd check how to use it properly.

I found this site which has got me a bit worried, because it says

I have an E-400 and an E-1, that I'm still getting used to. Neither has IS.

I've got the three 'kit' lenses and was hoping to be able to use at least the 14-42mm and 40-150mm handheld at least f8 or f10.

Does anybody have any experience of using a polariser with these lenses and cameras?

Also, separate thing.

There's a formula of some sort or other in a thread that gives a rough guide for shutter speed suitable for handheld, but I can't find it.

I have to admit I didn't fully understand it either, because I couldn't see how it worked - because it changed all the time. Surely there has to be a tipping point, when handheld without IS is almost impossible?
Lots of people will tell you that you can't hand hold at slow speeds or you need to use higher speeds with longer lenses. To a degree this is true, however with practice you can do it. If you stand with your feet together you wobble, so feet at least as wide apart as your shoulders. If you can, be a tripod, and lean against something solid. Never be uncomfortable, as soon as your body is in a funny position it moves to get it'self more comfortable and that when the shakes start. Breathing is very important as is squeezing the release rather than pressing it...

IS really helps a lot but it's no substitute for good basic techniques.

Practice with the lens set at longest length and a small apature to give you slow speeds and see just how good you get...

Have fun
__________________
Graham

We often repeat the mistakes we most enjoy...
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 22nd April 2009
StephenL's Avatar
StephenL StephenL is offline
Senior Pixelmonger
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 9,863
Thanks: 984
Thanked 1,126 Times in 921 Posts
Likes: 658
Liked 755 Times in 499 Posts
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

It's a funny thing, but since I moved over to Olympus, using their superb lenses, I found that I need to use polarizing filters much less.
__________________
Stephen

A camera takes a picture. A photographer makes a picture

Fuji X system, + Leica and Bronica film

My Flickr site
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 22nd April 2009
Nick Temple-Fry's Avatar
Nick Temple-Fry Nick Temple-Fry is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,395
Thanks: 17
Thanked 190 Times in 142 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

Ellie

I think what they are saying is for a perfectly exposed scene shot with out a polariser you'll need to shoot for the longer time to get an 'identical' scene with the polariser - which begs the question why, if the original scene was perfectly exposed, are they using the polariser?

In practise you use the polariser when you've got signifigant areas of over-exposure (such as a burnt out sky) so the difference in speed will be less noticeable.

I've certainly used a polariser on the kit lenses, if the day is bright enough to need the polariser then there should be enough light to keep the speed up, though obviously the 'quality' of light is different throughout the scene.

Are you using the 40-150 mk 1, memory suggests the front element rotates when you zoom, which means the degree of polarisation also alters. Not always what you want.

Nick
__________________
Nick Temple-Fry

Medicine as a science ranks somewhere between archaeology and economics.

www.theChurchPhotographer.co.uk 90 Churches -- Fairford St Mary's, exceptionally splendid
www.temple-fry.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 22nd April 2009
EH1
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Smile Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

Elle,
I totally agree with everything Nick has just said! however you could always raise the ISO a little to compensate for the slower shutter speed! (however i would`nt go much over ISO 400 as noise will then start causing you problems).I hope this helps.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 22nd April 2009
benvendetta's Avatar
benvendetta benvendetta is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Pontypool, South Wales
Posts: 3,746
Thanks: 83
Thanked 297 Times in 262 Posts
Likes: 167
Liked 339 Times in 229 Posts
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

I always use a polariser when I am shooting film (slides actually) but rarely with digital. It just doesn't seem to need this and I am happy with the saturation of the skies that I get.
A real disadvantage of polarisers is the fall-off that can occur, which shows itself as varying degrees of saturation across the sky. They are performing at their best when used at right angles to the sun. Your comment about loss of speed is less relevent if you are shooting in very sunny conditions, which is when a polariser will be most useful.
__________________
Dave

E-M1 Mk2, Pen F, HLD-9, 17, 25, 45, 60 macro, 12-40 Pro, 40-150 Pro, 12-50, 40-150, 75-300, MC-14, MMF-3 (all micro 4/3rds), 7-14 (4/3rds), 50, 135 (OM), GoPro Hero 3, Novo/Giottos/ Manfrotto supports. Lowepro, Tamrac, Manfrotto, and Billingham bags.

External Competition Secretary, Cwmbran PS & Welsh Photographic Federation Judge
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 22nd April 2009
Archphoto
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

About the only time I use a pol filter is when I have to photograph a glass table... otherwise I never do.
The skies over Brazil are blue enough anyway, most of the times at least, and the Oly lenses are picking up that blue very well

Peter
Architectural Photographer, Goi‚nia, Brazil
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 22nd April 2009
photonutter's Avatar
photonutter photonutter is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St Helens Merseyside
Posts: 270
Thanks: 15
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

Cant say I have a problem with hand held shots when using a polarizer.
Squeezing the shutter when exhaling helps along with an open stance.


Hand held with polarizing filter.Could have easily had a faster shutter as this was ISO 50.

Though I prefer using coupled with a ND X4 filter with does need a tripod.


One thing I would say is f5.6 gives ample depth of field, and surely the best sharpness, so anything more seems a waste.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 22nd April 2009
MarkVarley
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

Probably already been covered but I don't have time to read all replies...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellie View Post
I have an E-400 and an E-1, that I'm still getting used to. Neither has IS.

I've got the three 'kit' lenses and was hoping to be able to use at least the 14-42mm and 40-150mm handheld at least f8 or f10.

Does anybody have any experience of using a polariser with these lenses and cameras?
I rarely need a polarizing filter, when I do it's usually for reflections rather than saturation but I don't notice a change in shutterspeed (ie I don't find I'm needing a tripod more)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellie View Post
Also, separate thing.

There's a formula of some sort or other in a thread that gives a rough guide for shutter speed suitable for handheld, but I can't find it.

I have to admit I didn't fully understand it either, because I couldn't see how it worked - because it changed all the time. Surely there has to be a tipping point, when handheld without IS is almost impossible?
The general thing is the focal length = slowest shutterspeed, 50mm = 1/50s or faster.

It's a general rule, different people can hand hold a camera steadier than others, I can do 1/2 second usually without a problem.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 23rd April 2009
HughofBardfield's Avatar
HughofBardfield HughofBardfield is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Great Bardfield, Essex, UK
Posts: 730
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

As others have said above, I find I rarely use a polariser these days, although I used one more often than not with 35mm (so much so that my default was to leave it attached to the 28mm I used as my "standard" lens...).

I find with digital my preference is for ND Grads to knock the sky (or sometimes the foreground) back a bit, and the polariser only comes out for reflections. I think modern glasses and/or lens designs render skies better saturated than was the case 25-odd years ago.

With 14mm as your widest lens, there shouldn't be too much problem with banding in the sky caused by varying polarisation, but if you decide to go wider at some stage, this will become more of an issue. By the wide end of the 11-22, it is getting to be a real problem.

Whatever lens it's used with, some light loss is the automatic and inevitable penalty for using a polariser, however. This needn't be a problem in reasonable light: even on the E1, ISO400 is usually perfectly acceptable. As others have said above, hand-holding at longer focal lengths is something that can be readilly improved with practice. Graham's advice above is excellent. Oddly enough, I find it easier with heavier cameras like the E1 + HLD2 - I think the weight tends to help iron out the shakes somewhat.

Nick is right about the rotating front of the 40-150 being a problem with any filter you have to rotate. The other thing to mention (so obvious I hesitate to mention it ) is don't use a pola when wearing polarising sunglasses... I did - once!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 27th April 2009
Ray Shotter Ray Shotter is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lowestoft, Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 212
Thanks: 30
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

Ellie,

I have read the explanations on the "Physics Site" you drew our attention to and found it very informative - reminding me of my Physics Studies some many years ago. The only thing they didn't mention was that dust in the atmosphere also reflects light and does affect how blue the sky appears both to the eye and to the camera. In this country we have considerable amounts of dust in the atmosphere even close to the coast which always affects how blue the sky appears. I am sure you are aware that the atmosphere is at its cleanest shortly after rain and photographs taken at that time probably won't need a polarising filter. You may have read Barney Briton's assessment of the E-620 in Amateur Photographer magazine dated 18 April 2009. He suggests that the problem of "loss of details in highlights or burn-out in the sky" may be due to the "base ISO" setting of the E-System cameras. I quote part of his explanation as follows;

"Using ESP metering, I was impressed to see that very few of my pictures showed any significant loss of detail in highlight areas. Of those that do, the majority were taken at ISO 100. Having noticed the same effect on previous E-System DSLRs, I set up a few scenes and shot them at ISO 100 and then at ISO 200, adjusting the exposure be 1EV to compensate. Those images taken at ISO 100 contain brighter highlights, in which detail is often lost.... This suggests that ISO 200 (or thereabouts) is the base ISO setting of the E-620."

I must say I was surprised to read this but when I owned an E-510 I did notice that the sky highlight details on my photos were sometimes lost if not burnt out. I have tried a few experiments whith my E-3 and can't see any difference in the same scene shot at ISO 100 and ISO 200. But I thought I would draw your attention to his comments since you appear to be looking for a solution using a polarising filter.

My own use of a polarising filter is limited to removing unwanted reflections from wet leaves on trees, rooftops, glare off the sea etc.. and when photographing fish from above the water. One thing I can confirm is there is always some loss of light intensity at whatever angle to the sun you use a polarising filter. Neverthless, with experimentation you will find that some shots are much improved when a polarising filter is used.

Ray.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 28th April 2009
Ellie Ellie is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SW Hants, UK
Posts: 2,382
Thanks: 62
Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

Hmm, interesting thoughts, thank you.

The polarising filter I bought is a circular one that screws onto the end of the lens. It's fiddly because the lens hood has to be taken off to fit it. I haven't really had the chance to try it out yet, I'm wondering if it was a waste of money.

What you've all said (sorry, I won't reply individually) goes to show that nothing's "set in stone" and some information on the web might no longer be relevant. It's really a case of try it and see.

Ray, slightly relevant to what you said about the light after rain.

It's been a rather dismal day here today but it finished with a rainbow, which was quite nice. A really curious thing happened not long before the rainbow appeared. It was still raining but the sun came out and suddenly everything turned a curious shade of yellow. It didn't last long enough for me to get my camera and try to take a picture of it. Typical, isn't it?
__________________
- my pictures -
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 28th April 2009
dbutch's Avatar
dbutch dbutch is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Yateley, Hampshire
Posts: 652
Thanks: 46
Thanked 29 Times in 19 Posts
Likes: 21
Liked 13 Times in 9 Posts
Re: Polarising filter - and a tripod?

Hi Ellie

On my recent trip to Portugal I did put the polarising filter on a few times, and a couple of shots the effect was possible too much but on a couple of boat trips we did along the coast I certainly felt it helped bring out the coulours in some of the rock formations (did some without to compare) I will try and find some suitable compares and post for you when I get a chance.
My take on polarising filters is its not just about the skies they also can help boost saturation of colours aswell.

Dave
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Polarising filter PeterD Telephoto 4 13th November 2008 10:16 PM
Circular Polarising Filters PaulE Lens focus 9 27th September 2008 09:30 PM
Used Tripod E-P1 fan For sale or wanted small ads 0 15th July 2008 11:05 AM
Polarising Filters: screw on or system? theMusicMan Accessory talk 42 29th April 2008 12:42 PM
Circular Polarising filter use...? theMusicMan Accessory talk 9 28th April 2008 01:05 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:12 AM.


© The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger