3 Filters for Digital Photography

You might think that Photoshop and other post-production software programs have made lens filters obsolete but there are still 3 filters that digital photographers cannot be without.

1. U/V or Protection Filter. The sensor on your camera may not be vulnerable to ultraviolet light but the traditional U/V filter is still useful to protect the front element of your lens. A U/V or clear protective filter will protect your lens from scratches, dust and fingerprints at a relatively low cost. You should have one on each of your lenses, it’s cheap insurance. Click here for inexpensive U/V filters.

2. Polarizing Filter. A polarizing filter has a few uses and its effects cannot easily be replicated on the computer. Most commonly it is used to increase the contrast between the clouds and the sky. It does this by removing polarized component of light from the photograph. Another comon use to remove reflections in water or glass surfaces. These filters work best when used at a 90 angle from the sun. Note that you want a CIRCULAR polarizer for digital cameras. Click here for circular polarizers.

3. Neutral Density Filter. This filter reduces the amount of light that hits the camera’s sensor and allows you greater control over your exposure under bright conditions. A typical use would be to photograph a waterfall or running water during bright daylight with a long exposure time in order to create a silky, motion-blur effect. Another use is to use a larger aperture when shooting video with your DSLR. If you want to use the correct shutter speed based on your frame rate (usually around 60 for 30fps video) you will not be able to shoot with your lens wide open to obtain shallow depth of field without overexposing the scene. If you are already at your lowest ISO the only thing you can do to lower the exposure time is to reduce the available light. You can buy neutral density filters in various densities but the best value is a variable ND filter which you can adjust to suit the circumstances. Click here for ND filters.

Posted in Accessories | Tagged , | Leave a comment

3 Tips for Sharp DSLR Video.

You may have given up your camcorder because your DSLR can shoot HD video but the results you are getting aren’t exactly what you want. Try the following tips to get better quality video.

canon hd movie

1. Use a smaller aperture (large f-stop number). Closing down your lens to f/11 instead of trying to shoot wide open will get you a greater depth of field and allow more of your subject to be in focus.

2. Shoot at a wider angle. You will have a larger in-focus area at wide angle as opposed to telephoto. In addition your footage will be more stable and appear less shaky. Camera shake will be amplified if you are zoomed in.

3. Use image stabilization. If you are shooting video hand held the I.S. feature of your lens or camera will help remove shakiness from your shots.

The above tips will help you get steady, in-focus video from your camera. But what about when you want very shallow depth of field? It is possible but requires more planning in your shots. I will cover this in an upcoming post.

Posted in Video | Tagged | Leave a comment

Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L or 24-105 f/4 L Lens?

Most anyone who is considering buying either the legendary Canon 24-70L f/2.8L or 24-105 f/4L has certainly wondered which of these two competing lenses is best.  The 24-70 which replaced the earlier 28-70 is the classic photojournalist and wedding photographer’s lens.  The 24-105 seems to be a general purpose walk-around lens with greater range, lacking the faster f/2.8 aperture but gaining image stabilization.  Which lens is better depends on how you plan to use it.

Canon 24-70

Indoors in low-light the 24-70 has the advantage of letting in a stop more light than the 24-105.  The 24-105 does have I.S. allowing for use of 2-3 stops lower shutter speed but this would be helpful only when photographing a stationary subject.  The wider max aperture of the 24-70 also allows for a narrower depth of field to help isolate a subject against the background, however the 24-105 gives you the option of increasing your focal length and thereby making the depth of field more shallow.  At the end of the day shooting moving subjects in less than ideal light you would want the 24-70.

Canon 24-105

Outside shooting handheld the I.S. on the 24-105 is very useful.  I also find that the 24-105 is sharper at f/4 than the 24-70 is at f2.8.  The extra zoom range is also appreciated.  Not to mention that the 24-105 is a good deal lighter (by half a pound) and more compact than the 24-70.  Price-wise the lenses are close enough that if you are considering one or the other the other cost isn’t likely to be a deciding factor.

When making the choice between these two lenses ultimately it comes down to the shooter’s requirements.  The 24-70 is chosen by wedding photographers because it excels at taking pictures of people, who are likely not stationary, in low light and isolating them from the background. The 24-105 is an ideal lens for outdoor use and taking photos of moving subjects in GOOD light.  The stabilization helps in taking shots of stationary subjects in marginal light.  It’s smaller weight, size and increased zoom range make it quite versatile. In addition it is somewhat cheaper than the 24-70, the difference being enough to buy a 50mm f/1.8 prime lens for shooting in low light situations.

For my shooting style, the 24-105 is the clear choice.  As much as I love the dreamy out of focus background that the 24-70 can produce at f2.8 I find that the 24-105 does a good enough job at blurring the background at f/4 when zoomed all the way in.  I also appreciate the lighter weight and compactness of the 105 and find that with the longer zoom range I can carry it as my only lens.  The 24-70 is bulky enough without having to carry another lens for more reach.

Both are great lenses and what’s best for me may not be right for someone else.  What’s more, these two lenses do not necessarily present an either/or choice.  They’re different enough that I wonder why they are so often compared.  Sure they are mid-range, L zooms with similar pricing but they are designed for different shooting situations.  The question then isn’t so much about the lens as it is about the photographer.

Did you have to make the choice between these two lenses? Leave a comment below and let me know which one you decided on and why.

Posted in Lenses | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Choosing an f/2.8 Lens for Canon Crop DSLRs

If you are looking to upgrade your DSLRs kit lens to a fast 2.8 standard zoom you currently have three choices:

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II VC

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM OS

Sigma ex dc 17-50 hsm os

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

canon ef-s 17-55 is usm

 

All three lenses feature image stabilization, constant f/2.8 aperture and autofocus.  The Sigma and Canon autofocus via a silent wave or ultrasonic motor whereas the Tamron uses a less sophisticated and louder autofocus motor.  Of the three the Canon is the only one that features full-time manual focus override.  The focus wheel on the Sigma and Tamron moves during autofocus, which some users may find annoying.

Price-wise the Tamron is least expensive at around $649 USD.  The Sigma has a selling price of roughly $670 USD.  The Canon is the most expensive of the trio at $1150 USD.

So which one should you buy?  The earlier version of the Tamron 17-50 which did not feature image stabilization or VC (Vibration Compensation) had a reputation for being one of the best values in a 2.8 zoom.  It was known for it’s exceptional sharpness and value.  However this has changed somewhat with the new VC version.  This newer lens is considerably softer throughout the zoom range at 2.8 and has to be stopped down significantly to match the performance of the old lens.  It’s image stabilizer is very effective however, easily as good as the Sigma or Canon, but it is noisier which may be an issue for those recording video with their cameras.

For the modest premium you pay for the Sigma you get MUCH better image quality , the Sigma is VERY sharp at f/2.8.  In addition it has a more solid build, quieter and faster autofocus and even comes with a nice case.  Seems like the one to get.

So why would you consider the Canon EF-S 17-55 for $1150?  For starters its image quality rivals that of the Tamron and Sigma and even that of the legendary full frame Canon 24-70 f/2.8L. It offers fantastic build quality, silent and fast autofocus and full-time manual focus override.  As a bonus the focus wheel does not rotate during autofocus operation.  If you want the best image quality the Canon wins hands-down.

If money were no object the Canon would be the lens to get , but taking price into consideration the Sigma is the best value of this group.  The previous (non-VC) version of the Tamron 17-50 used to be the value leader but with the higher price of the new model and the softness of the image it can no longer compete.

I’d like to hear which lens you would pick.  Please leave a comment below.

Posted in Lenses | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment