BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Questions

Photography Question 
Barbara J. Eads
BetterPhoto Member Since: 6/26/2004
 

Filters on Digital cameras


Hi I was wondering if anyone has had problem with using lens filters on digital cameras. It seems to add noise to my pictures when you use them., does anyone have any suggestions.? by the way I have a digital slr canon 20d
Thanks,
Barb Eads


To love this question, log in above
5/10/2005 4:29:45 PM

 
Michael H. Cothran   What type of filter??


To love this comment, log in above
5/11/2005 12:21:26 PM

 
shannon casey   I've been using a polarizing filter on my 20D in bright daylight situations for a month or so and haven't noticed any problems. Just as with a film camera, it seems to do the job. (And I have heard and read that trying to apply such a filter effect in PS and such can be tricky.) But I tend to be a fan of such filters anyway; so I'm looking forward to what others have to say.


To love this comment, log in above
5/11/2005 4:01:07 PM

 
John D. Gretzinger   I also have a 20D and use the Cokin filters with it. The set I always take with me include the circular polizer, ND2, ND4, one of the rainbow filters and a couple of gradient filters. Oh yes, I keep UV screw on filters on all my lesnes for protection.

The circular polarizer is interesting in that when the lens autofocuses I have to realign the polarizer to where I want it. I have not found any problem with noise so far.

Anyone using Lee filters???


To love this comment, log in above
5/13/2005 11:13:59 AM

 

BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/28/2003
  Not to be a party-pooper, but why on earth would you use a filter on a digital camera when you can do everything with Photoshop? Just shoot, and play later. You have much more flexibility and much more creative freedom that way.


To love this comment, log in above
5/13/2005 12:08:31 PM

 
Terry  R. Hatfield
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/4/2003
  Exactly Jerry,Just A Uv Filter And All Others Can Be Added In Ps:-)


To love this comment, log in above
5/13/2005 6:43:02 PM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  except for some things a polarizer does.


To love this comment, log in above
5/13/2005 8:06:58 PM

 
Irene Troy
BetterPhoto Member Since: 5/27/2004
  Okay, I had to respond to this question of why use a filter on a digital camera when you can do everything in PS. IMHO you may as well ask why anyone would want to learn about exposure, composition or the hundred other things that one needs to know in order to make a truly exceptional shot. After all, if you miss the exposure you can always fix it in PS; if you don’t want to get up early and shoot in first light, well add those wonderful highlights in PS; composition poor? Tree growing out someone’s head? PS to the rescue! In fact, extrapolating the theory that everything can be fixed in PS, then why spend all that money on a camera with interchangeable lenses and adjustable exposure controls? Take the snapshot and go back to the computer and fix the shot to your liking.

Personally, the reason why I am learning how to use filters properly, the reason why I study exposure and composition so intensely is because I love photography. I appreciate the capabilities of Photoshop and recognize that correcting a photo in the digital darkroom is much the same as correcting a photo in the traditional darkroom. I use PS to fine tune my shots when needed; however, I first try to make the best possible shot I can. This includes using a polarizer and ND filters when needed. Personally, I prefer being outside trying to find and make a terrific shot instead of sitting inside trying to turn a marginal shot into something truly special, something that IMHO, even the best PS guru cannot accomplish.


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 4:02:42 AM

 
Terry  R. Hatfield
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/4/2003
  Your Missing The Point Here Irene,The Thread Is About Filters, Nothing To Do With Comp Or Any Other Photographic Elements Their Are Plenty Of Photographers That Still Actually Shoot Their Image Correctly:-)
I Dont Like Loosing 2or3Stops Just To Use Certain Filters
Thats What Exposure Comp,White Balance And Other Settings Are For In The Camera, I Do Shoot At The Right Time Of Day And Catch A Nap In Midday:-)

Hi John! Sounds Like You Have A Linear Poloraizer You Shouldnt Have To Re Adjust A Circular Polarizer..

Hey Gregory What Color You Want,
How About A Litte Warming Filter To Go With That:-)

Barbara,I Have Really Neglected Giving You And Anwser I Know Of No Filter That Would Give Your Images A Grainy Apperance (I Am Assuming Your Talking About Standard Type Filters (ie Polarizing,ND'S Warming And Such It Might Enhance The Higher ISO That Your Using?Which Otherwise Wouldnt Be Detected As Easily.


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 4:56:44 AM

 
Sharon Barberee   I too have had this problem. I was using a UV filter on my Sigma 70-200 F2.8 with a Canon Rebel 300D. My photos just didnt look real sharp. I shot photos of the same flower with and without, and saw a remarkable difference so I have taken it off.


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 6:11:58 AM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  To Irene, if you miss exposure you can't always fix it in photoshop, corel, or anywhere else. That includes the lightening or darkening when negs are printing. That's a worn out, overboard response. And falacy.
To Terry, I wasn't talking about adding color. The glare a poloarizer removes that lets you see thru a window. And if you try to say just shoot from another angle and cut and paste, then you're being ridiculous as Irene is.


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 8:49:25 AM

 
Irene Troy
BetterPhoto Member Since: 5/27/2004
  Gregory and Terry - my apologies if what I said offended you. I was responding to Jerry's comment "why would anyone use a filter when you can do everything in Photoshop". What I meant was that NO you cannot do everything in PS. (or any other editing software). That is the real fallacy that seems to be fairly prevalent among many beginning digital photographers. Photoshop is a great tool when used correctly but you still have to do the camera work before going to the computer. That was and IS my point – hope that does not still sound ridiculous to you. Actually, I think we probably agree on this point anyway.


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 9:55:38 AM

 
Terry  R. Hatfield
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/4/2003
  I Can Remove Glare In Ps After All It Is a Polarizer Filter And Unwanted Reflections Too, Anything A Screw On Polarizer Can Do Can Be Done In Ps Gregory,You Should Try Some Of The Newer Filters You Would Be Suprised:-)
I Can Shoot At The Same Angles With And Without The Polarizer And Get An Equal Result After Appling The Filter In Ps Plus It Can Be Positioned In The Image As To All Or A Portion Of It With A Blend Option Too And You Cant Tell The Difference Try That With A Screw On Polarizer:-)

No Offense Taken Here Irene:-)


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 10:26:36 AM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  Only if there's an image of something there that you bring out. A click of a polarizer filter can't add what isn't there to see in the first place.


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 2:12:12 PM

 
Terry  R. Hatfield
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/4/2003
  Were Not Talking About Adding Anything To An Image Were Talking About Removing Unwanted Reflections And Controling Glare And Such Gregory Geeze!LOL! Your Staring To Sound Like A Politician:-)


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 2:27:43 PM

 

BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/28/2003
  Irene, with all due respect, exposure, composition, etc., can only be corrected if it is within range. With digital, it's a pretty small range. However, with filters, you CAN do anything. I can make it blue, I can make it warm, I can do anything a filter can do. the reason is that with a filter, all you are doing is changing the light. That can be done in PS. The problem with your statement is that if you take a photograph without using a filter, you can do anything you want. If you take it with a filter, and don't like it, you're stuck, you can't unfilter it. But if you use layers in PS, you can unfilter it.

I shoot and process over 3,000 digital images a week using a variety of tools. PS being one of them. I have a pretty good grasp about the positive and negative points of digital imaging.

When I asked why you would use a filter, it was because it really doesn't make sense. It is a limitation, not an asset. The only reason you had filters with film, is because most people didn't have a darkroom, for one, and this way you could just get the images the way you want it in the camera. However, digital imaging has made this almost a non-issue. I am always surprised when I see photographers shooting digital with filters. A few quick actions and I can produce anything a filter can do, with way more control because I can choose the level of filter effect.

Everything is a trade off, and shooting correctly in-camera is a goal of mine. But using effects can all be done in post production.

Jerry


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 3:16:00 PM

 
Irene Troy
BetterPhoto Member Since: 5/27/2004
  Good Grief Jerry! I certainly bow to your much, much, much greater experience in the digital darkroom!!! My only remaining question is - with 3000 shots a week how are your wrists, shoulders, hands and arms holding up? After just a couple of hours sitting in front of my computer trying to work in PS my whole body is aching.


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 6:02:07 PM

 

BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/28/2003
  Irene, I use actions and let PS do it's thing while I enjoy lunch :)


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 6:36:17 PM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  Try it this way one more time, cause I don't know how much simplier to make it.
The Glare That's On A Window Or Anything Transparent That Prevents You From Seeing Through It, Not Talking About A Light Image Of What's On The Other Side, I'm Talking About White Glare You Can't See Through, A Photoshop Filter Won't Fix That.
Not The Same As Darkening A Sky. You Have The Image Of The Sky. With Glare That Makes A Window Opaque, That's Your Image. A Filter Is Not Going To Be Able To Reveal What Was On The Other Side Of The Window If What Was On The Other Side Of The Window Is Not On The Image.
http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/polarizer.html try that and look at the 11th paragraph, the one that starts with "To be sure, there are advantages to real polarizers."
If you don't get what I'm talking about after that, then never mind.


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 7:18:19 PM

 

BetterPhoto Member
  You can tell Gregie is typing more often than taking pictures, cause there are so many capitals LETTERS. I would stick with people who hardly ever write, which usually have the right answer. Micheal C. is the only one that usually makes sense. To sum it all up, let just say you have 70-200mm IS like mau. Then you should buy the same quality glass as your lens. Nothing is cheap and if you do buy so then so is your quality. If its expensive there is a reason. Now if its fault of creativity, it will come with time. Some are born with it and others want it so bad , but never find it.


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 8:12:29 PM

 

BetterPhoto Member
  I looked at your pics and you are there, just be patient on the landscape scenes. Ansel Adams sometimes spent a whole week Mornings and Evenings to get the perfect exposure. Patience


To love this comment, log in above
5/14/2005 8:16:05 PM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  Kazoo's still preoccupied with trying to think of a comeback.
Don't worry about the part with the caps. There was a reason, just not worth explaining if you're not familiar with it.


To love this comment, log in above
5/15/2005 3:27:47 AM

 
Log in to respond or ask your own question.