p.2 #1 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Gil_W wrote:
I don't think you could get quite the same affects of an ND or pol filter with moving water. True, you can try to fake the smoothed ND water effect, but hard to beat the real thing. Also, to be able to see through the glare on water to see fish, rocks etc would be hard for software to replicate.
I know software can do fake bokeh, tilt shift, soft focus, IR, NDs, star effects, etc,..but just not quite the same as the real thing to my eyes. (star affect is nice though : ) )
Not everything, but most what I need I did. It is perfect and all photographers I know and suggested this software - stopped using optical filters for most needs they have. That is all I could say ...
p.2 #3 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Breitling65 wrote:
Not everything, but most what I need I did. It is perfect and all photographers I know and suggested this software - stopped using optical filters for most needs they have. That is all I could say ...
Can you illustrate this, say, cutting down on glare/reflection? I will believe it only after I've seen it. World class nature photographers like Marc Adamus recognizes the limitations of software manipulation. Perhaps you know better?
p.2 #4 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Breitling65 wrote:
[
I didn't say it will but is this only why you need CPL? No magic in real world and everything having limitations. But if I need to cut reflections or implement CPL rotation - I don't have to spend > $100 for useless to me filter.
We are not just talking about bluing up the skies or adding a bit of contrast for haze. If an image, which was taken without a cpol/pol, has an area that due to reflection is blown out (no data), or is not seeing beneath water due to reflection, (again no data), your software, no matter how good it is, cannot replace that data unless you are using pasted or the cloned information.
Perhaps a CPOL is useless to you, but I'm sure many people find it beneficial, I know I do.
p.2 #5 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Do they make large rectangular CPL's, similar to GNDs? If so, that may be an option if you can find a really big one and bring it really close to the front element.
Software may be able to mimic the color and contrast effects, but it can't duplicate the glare removal, seeing through water, and reflection removal off leaves, for example.
I wouldn't say a CPL would be useless on a wide lens. Often times a landscape might include mostly foliage and water and the dark banding in the sky wouldn't be an issue. Even if you did want a sky, if you shoot vertically, the streaking problem is far less of an issue, even with UWA lenses.
p.2 #6 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Ariel Bravy wrote:
Do they make large rectangular CPL's, similar to GNDs? If so, that may be an option if you can find a really big one and bring it really close to the front element.
Software may be able to mimic the color and contrast effects, but it can't duplicate the glare removal, seeing through water, and reflection removal off leaves, for example.
I wouldn't say a CPL would be useless on a wide lens. Often times a landscape might include mostly foliage and water and the dark banding in the sky wouldn't be an issue. Even if you did want a sky, if you shoot vertically, the streaking problem is far less of an issue, even with UWA lenses....Show more →
Yes Cokin's system will work and rotate. I prefer just to slip a bit of Gel on the back of the 14L. No Cpol affect there but it does work when needed. For ND's it works well and it's all cheaper then getting into a Cokin system for one lens.
p.2 #7 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Gil_W wrote:
We are not just talking about bluing up the skies or adding a bit of contrast for haze. If an image, which was taken without a cpol/pol, has an area that due to reflection is blown out (no data), or is not seeing beneath water due to reflection, (again no data), your software, no matter how good it is, cannot replace that data unless you are using pasted or the cloned information.
Perhaps a CPOL is useless to you, but I'm sure many people find it beneficial, I know I do.
Your only argument - seeing beneath water doesn't make much power to me. That is one shot from hundreds and I would manage it without any CPL if I need. Main functionality of CPL - removing reflections from water and metal I could do with software CPL, besides much more than this ...
Actually CPL makes wide shots ugly most of the time, with spots not many likes. Here is example and explanations from very reputable source.
p.2 #9 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
thw2 wrote:
Can you illustrate this, say, cutting down on glare/reflection? I will believe it only after I've seen it. World class nature photographers like Marc Adamus recognizes the limitations of software manipulation. Perhaps you know better?
Get trial version of this software I suggested above and try yourself. It is simple plug-in to photoshop. Also they have pretty easy online video class how to use and configure soft CPL and other filters to do job.
p.2 #10 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Breitling65 wrote:
Get trial version of this software I suggested above and try yourself. It is simple plug-in to photoshop. Also they have pretty easy online video class how to use and configure soft CPL and other filters to do job.
Thanks. I decided to give the trial software a shot. And I admit it works much better than expected. Here's what I think:
Pros:
- no more ugly uneven polarization effects on sky
- no vignetting problems due to stacking of multiple filters
- cheaper and less hassle of attaching/removing filters
Cons:
- unable to 'see' beneath surface of clear waters
- unable to reproduce color enhancing effects due to long exposures
- without ND grad filters, one must watch histogram carefully to ensure skies etc are not blown; recovery of details from shadows may produce noise
I think from now on, I'll use my polariser only when I want to show details beneath clear waters.
p.2 #11 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Ariel Bravy wrote:
Do they make large rectangular CPL's, similar to GNDs? If so, that may be an option if you can find a really big one and bring it really close to the front element.
p.2 #12 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
thw2 wrote:
Thanks. I decided to give the trial software a shot. And I admit it works much better than expected. Here's what I think:
Pros:
- no more ugly uneven polarization effects on sky
- no vignetting problems due to stacking of multiple filters
- cheaper and less hassle of attaching/removing filters
Cons:
- unable to 'see' beneath surface of clear waters
- unable to reproduce color enhancing effects due to long exposures
- without ND grad filters, one must watch histogram carefully to ensure skies etc are not blown; recovery of details from shadows may produce noise
I think from now on, I'll use my polariser only when I want to show details beneath clear waters. ...Show more →
Exactly, besides I just use ND filter from same package an it is working amazingly good! Also got same response from my friend who been skeptical before too, he is amazed of ND soft filter abilities.
Yes, software not going to substitute everything, but at least I could change settings and redo my shots PP any time and any way by changing settings, not sure if you could comeback with optical filter any place you been before if you shot something incorrect for example. Computer LCD is bigger, and you could see your results and change them.
p.2 #13 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
I have three of Nik's plugins, Viveza, Sharpener Pro and Dfine. I did try their color effex several months ago and was not that impressed since I could do most of their effects with gear I already had.
While doing software filtering may be fine for some, I actually enjoy going out to my local streams, rivers and waterfalls (which there are many where I live) and doing the set ups. I still believe the actual affect from filters or my converted to IR 20D produces a nicer affect then what software can.
To each there own.
Below is a cropped image from my driveway this morning with a 14L II with a pol gel filter attached to the rear of the lens. That lower layer of white is dense valley fog. I think it would be a hard shot to get without a filter due to the very bright sun shot head on, high altitude sky and bright reflection off the fog.
p.2 #14 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
I prefer to use filters, I dont care what anyone says, I have never seen a software program that would let me turn a 1 second shot into a 30 second shot.
p.2 #15 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Hey.Underpants wrote:
I prefer to use filters, I dont care what anyone says, I have never seen a software program that would let me turn a 1 second shot into a 30 second shot.
While your preference is noted, the OP was asking for a polarizer for a 14 F2.8L which cannot use front filters and only drop in gel filters - the software was an alternative since a real polarizer can't be used.
p.2 #16 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Gil_W wrote:
I think it would be a hard shot to get without a filter due to the very bright sun shot head on, high altitude sky and bright reflection off the fog.
I just finished PP these shots I did two days ago in Canada, software CPL works perfect to my needs. Also harsh front lights and reflections there ...
p.2 #17 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Those are nice images but I'll bet the sun is a lot stronger at my latitude and altitude.
Well we are not going to convince each other and we can agree to that.
Like I stated, to each their own but I enjoy being out there and doing the field work with the filters, the NDs on moving water especially and shooting IR with a camera.
p.2 #18 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
Gil_W wrote:
Those are nice images but I'll bet the sun is a lot stronger at my latitude and altitude.
Well we are not going to convince each other and we can agree to that.
Like I stated, to each their own but I enjoy being out there and doing the field work with the filters, the NDs on moving water especially and shooting IR with a camera.
I like to chip in and perhaps add that software CPL probably works, but within limits.
Seriously, based on what I see, it wouldn't cut it when you try shooting in the tropics or in the desert sun at full blast. Or for that matter, a hot sunny summer day at the beach.
Do bear in mind that sunlight in the higher latitudes is a pretty different preposition to somewhere nearer the tropics. The challenges posed and required to get a good shot and exposure are a whole lot different. From what I've tried, its that much easier to nail the exposure and saturation to get the most out of a picture when I was in Northern California and London and Paris than say in Thailand and Singapore.
p.2 #19 · Is there a polarizer for the 14mm 2.8L II?
beauport wrote:
While your preference is noted, the OP was asking for a polarizer for a 14 F2.8L which cannot use front filters and only drop in gel filters - the software was an alternative since a real polarizer can't be used.
and everything having limitations. But if I need to cut reflections or implement CPL rotation - I don't have to spend > $100 for useless to me filter.