..Who needs a polarizer with the 14-24.when there is Capture NX2?..
Anyone who shoots other than blue skies, which is about 95% of the time for me. No program can do what a polarizer can do, which is eliminate reflections in the air, on rocks, trees, water, glass - just making them dark doesn't do anything other than making them dark. A polarizer cuts through the reflection and allows the true, rich colors to shine through - something no software can do. But if you only shoot blue skies than I guess you are all set, and very limited in what you can point your camera at...
Who needs a polarizer with the 14-24.when there is Capture NX2?
********
My intent wasn't to get into a debate about possible need for polarizing or any other type of filter but to explore possibilities for mounting filters on the 14-24 f/2.8. For my uses, I think both the ND Grads and the Schneider polarizing filter will prove to be useful.
Tim Ernst wrote:
..Who needs a polarizer with the 14-24.when there is Capture NX2?..
Anyone who shoots other than blue skies, which is about 95% of the time for me. No program can do what a polarizer can do, which is eliminate reflections in the air, on rocks, trees, water, glass - just making them dark doesn't do anything other than making them dark. A polarizer cuts through the reflection and allows the true, rich colors to shine through - something no software can do. But if you only shoot blue skies than I guess you are all set, and very limited in what you can point your camera at......Show more →
+1
Always annoying when you mention wanting to use filters on an ultra wide angle and always get the uniformed either saying how everything can be done in software, or that a polarizer isn't useful on wide angle because it will unevenly affect the sky.
I mainly use one to cut glare on water, and for the enhanced color saturation it can provide, not for darkening blue sky because blue sky is a seldom seen sight for me lol. Actually when theres a nice blue sky I'll often be shooting IR with a 87c filter to really make the sky black and the clouds pop
I have the cokin CP and it works at around 17mm I think? Maybe 18mm? But I basically give up on my CP until the 24-70 goes on the camera. You can stack 2 panels in the cokin x-pro holder at about 16-17mm if you're struggling with some crazy DR (I had to use my 2 and 3 stop GNDs the other morning).
Good information in all the above. No local store around here, but in reading all this I must conclude that I might use my polarizer's much more than I do. Seems to be no end to the hints one can find within the threads of this forum. MANY THANKS!!! Great night photo as well.
I agree with millsart that the 14-24 leaves me seriously wishing that my D700 had a lot more than 12mp's. I find myself cropping to closer to 16:9 on my 14mm shots to get the FoV that I had envisioned in my head. That leaves me shorter on resolution than I would like.
For some reason the FoV seems too wide on the vertical plane than what I am used to shooting the Sigma 10-20 on an APS-C sensor. Maybe I need to readjust my shooting habits, but there are times that I wish I could have tried out a 17-35.
I know why lots of people love this lens, I have it and it is a gem for its purpose.
However, if shooting landscapes, why not use a FL of 50 - 100mm? I think the looks is less distorted and makes you think harder about what is in or out of the frame. Just a thought.
DavidWEGS wrote:
I know why lots of people love this lens, I have it and it is a gem for its purpose.
However, if shooting landscapes, why not use a FL of 50 - 100mm? I think the looks is less distorted and makes you think harder about what is in or out of the frame. Just a thought.
Thats like saying why not paint using only a 2in brush and the color red and yellow only.
A shot may be best served by a 14mm, or a 50mm or perhaps even a 400mm lens depending on the conditions and the photographers personal artistic taste.
