Has anyone tried those ND2 to ND400 adjustable Camera Filters
- Thread starter lenmcgilvary
- Start date
I have a couple filters my dad got from that one major company.. I forget the name. Quality glass lenses tho. Meant for a different application but with some modifications they were able to be fitted onto our V2+ birds. I noticed a difference. I would say that they help for sure.
That said - I'm new to cameras outside of taking awesome photos with my iPhone or Note 4. I'm sure those filters help and choosing the right filter for your flight is a bit of a learning curve.
If you can learn it I'm sure you can apply it. I'm slowly learning post edits on my macbook and after I master that a bit I'm moving onto filters to help with all that. I see it as a learning hobby to keep my mind moving. No rush to learn it all in a year
That said - I'm new to cameras outside of taking awesome photos with my iPhone or Note 4. I'm sure those filters help and choosing the right filter for your flight is a bit of a learning curve.
If you can learn it I'm sure you can apply it. I'm slowly learning post edits on my macbook and after I master that a bit I'm moving onto filters to help with all that. I see it as a learning hobby to keep my mind moving. No rush to learn it all in a year
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2015
- Messages
- 181
- Reaction score
- 41
The phantom has a fixed aperture so ND filters are the most reasonable way to deal with bright light without using a very high shutter speed.
A high shutter speed makes the video look unrealistic. Movies uses a slower shutter speed to introduce a slight motion blur.
For pictures, a graduated ND filter can balance the light in the sky with the light on the ground. A non graduated filter is not as important with still images because fast shutter speeds are not a problem.
With a regular camera you would want an ND filter to control your aperture in bright light (to get a shallow depth of field for example.). Since the Phantom has a fixed 2.8 aperture, this is not necessary.
A high shutter speed makes the video look unrealistic. Movies uses a slower shutter speed to introduce a slight motion blur.
For pictures, a graduated ND filter can balance the light in the sky with the light on the ground. A non graduated filter is not as important with still images because fast shutter speeds are not a problem.
With a regular camera you would want an ND filter to control your aperture in bright light (to get a shallow depth of field for example.). Since the Phantom has a fixed 2.8 aperture, this is not necessary.
I've been wanting to try ND filters and have a set from PolarPro, but I can't get the original clear DJI lens cover off - it's too tight to take off by hand. Any suggestions?
From what I've read starting with an ND of 8 and even going up to 16 helps a lot. Here's a video (not mine) on the subject:
From what I've read starting with an ND of 8 and even going up to 16 helps a lot. Here's a video (not mine) on the subject:
I use nd8 during the golden hour (last hour of sunlight) and nd16 in the mornings after 10am till 3pm, on clear days in California. That's what I have found works best for me, this time of year. It minimizes the jitters when panning.
I would stay away from any vary NDs, first of all they don't behave well on wide lenses. You will get strange things happening to the sky as you pan around. Also vibration may change the setting while flying.
And I would not add anything heavier than the standard UV filter, because it would throw the balance of the camera off, you could try to add some counter weight to the back of the cam, but you would probably compromise the way the gimbal works. Brushless gimbals need to be in perfect balance to work well, especially really small ones.
The 8 and the 16 have you covered for most situations as stated above.
And I would not add anything heavier than the standard UV filter, because it would throw the balance of the camera off, you could try to add some counter weight to the back of the cam, but you would probably compromise the way the gimbal works. Brushless gimbals need to be in perfect balance to work well, especially really small ones.
The 8 and the 16 have you covered for most situations as stated above.
There is a thread somewhere in this forum that says this variable ND filter is significantly heavier than other fixed ND filters, around 10 grams compared to other fixed ND filters which are only a few grams, so it may affect the camera gimbal performance? Also it has this unwanted side-effect of vignette.
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2015
- Messages
- 181
- Reaction score
- 41
Use a blue medical glove (thin) and LIGHTLY twist it off. It comes off easy but if you squeeze hard it pinches it to the threads.
I tussled with it for 20 minutes and once I used a rubber glove EASILY it came right off.
The lens cover was on very tight on mine too. Easy to remove if you wrap a small rubber band around the stock lens cover and lightly squeeze with your fingers. It was too slippery for me to remove with bare fingers, the rubber band helps grip..
I have used the Polar Pro set of filters, I tried shooting video and pics with the polarizer filter on and it did as advertised.. reduced glare and enhanced color. I would say the pics were about 20% better than without the filter. I'm going to try the ND4 filter next.. here's a pic I took with my P3P and the polarizer filter, the color does look better than without.
Attachments
Last edited:
I use a nd 8 during bright days but yesterday shooting close up lavender fields at 7.00pm in Tasmania, 41 degrees S, produced blurry video. Shutter speed was 100, ISO 100. I will repeat the shoot with the normal uv filter.
Thanks everyone, i think the best set is the ones from Rainbow. I had wondered about the weight and vibration as well of the variable ones, and most of the variance is unneeded
Len
Len
Similar threads
