Canon 20D & Filters

[randy_kurtz]

Hello I have a Canon 20D and I use a UV,and a Circular Polarizer

Filters for all my lens like 17-40mm,24-70mm,70-200mm IS,and 50mm

1.4. I use photoshop cs and I shoot in raw, will it be worth the

money, to get more filters like a cooling,sky,and warming filters or

should I just use the software what is better?

[._kaa]

Software is better.

 

Cooling/warming filters are better applied in Photoshop since you have much greater control over results. Sky filter is usually just a UV/haze filter.

 

For shooting digital you only need a polarizer and maybe a UV filter for protection.

[mike_smith2]

Nope, use the software it is now free and fits all lenses irrespective of the front objective lens filter ring size.....

 

The only other filters you might consider are 2 or 3 stop full ND filters (not graduated) to reduce light entering the camera ie to increase length of exposure duration for creative techniques, eg blurring water or moving objects etc

 

Everything else can now be done more efficiently in the software.

[steve_dunn2]

<cite>Everything else can now be done more efficiently in the software.</cite>

 

<p>There used to be a couple of filters you needed because digital couldn't do the same thing: polarizers, and ND grads. Software still can't polarize, nor will it ever be able to unless sensors start detecting polarity (which isn't likely), but you already have that taken care of.</p>

 

<p>The very latest version of Photoshop (CS2) has now made ND grads obsolete for digital photographers, as it can <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/hdr.shtml">merge two (or more) frames of the same scene, exposed at different levels, into one photo</a>, allowing you to get around the limited dynamic range of digital. As with other types of filters, doing it in software offers more flexibility; for instance, you no longer need to find a single, straight line or zone where the transition between ND and clear should take place.</p>

[christopher_bibbs]

Clearly I'm in the minority, but I still prefer the look of shooting with filters over straight software manipulation. I'd rather get it right through the lens than try and correct things in the darkroom (digital or otherwise).

[rodger_newbold]

Randy -

Minor color balance issues may be tackled with a custom white balance setting. here is a

link that might be helpful: http://www.pictureline.com/newsletter/2004/august/

colorchart.html OR http://www.pictureline.com/newsletter/2004/november/

whitebalance.html .

 

I still feel that polarizing is better accomplished in the camera. A range of ND filters is

always good to have on hand. You can get the great effects like Michael Kenna's long

exposures.

 

I believe once the bugs are worked out of CS2 the new HDR will work for another control

of excessive density. With HDR or split ND filters you still need a tripod, so it is about an

even race.

 

The great thing is that we sure have more choices available than we did a few years ago.

Best Wishes -

Rodger the art center guy. [consultant to http://www.pictureline.com & dir of photo at

http://www.slacphot.net ]

[._kaa]

<p><i>I still prefer the look of shooting with filters over straight software manipulation</i>

 

<p>I have very strong doubts that you'll be able to distinguish whether, say, the warming of a scene was achieved through a warming filter on the lens or through Photoshop... There is NO difference in look.