mart_n_t

<p>Luis, thanks for the explanation, but I must add to my question that the IQ REALLY suffers in the mentioned conditions. I'm not talking abouth the normal IQ reduction at the zoom ends, but a proper image degradation up to the point where it becomes unusable.<br>

I take the filter off and the lens at, say, 150 mm, f/11, performs fantastically. It's not an astonishing glass (super-zoom, after all) but the pictures are very good. Not so with the filter on.<br>

However, this subject is just to ilustrate something that is happening with the pol filter, which I guess it has to do with difraction, and my question to you now would be if you have observed such effect with the ND filters at those zoom settings, or with a pol filter.<br>

Last, but not least, regarding the air/glass interfaces that you mention: isn't it common to use 2 ND filters simultaneously to achieve the desired exposure lenght?<br>

Thanks,<br>

Martín</p>

<p>Hi all,<br>

I've been thinking of experimenting with taking long exposures of moving subjects (water, people, vehicles...) in broad day light, for which I need to "turn down" the rate of light coming through the lens. For what I can make out, there are two alternatives:<br>

- 2 pol filters, which allow to control the amount of light by changing the relative angle of the polarization planes,<br>

- neutral density (not graduated) filters <- pretty known technique<br>

So, which one is best? Of course each would have its own array of advantages and disadvantages. Can somebody enlighten me?<br>

The reason I ask is because I already have a circular pol filter for my Nikkor 18-200 (72 mm) and I noticed that when I zoom to the long end (>100 mm) the quality of the pictures suffers a lot. Is it the lens or this is normal with zoom/pol filter combo? Will it happen with other filters (like the neutral density)?<br>

Thanks!<br>

Martín</p>

<p>hi guys, just an update. The pictures went actually very well because I had an overcast sky. I must have done something good in my previous life!</p>

<p>Thanks for your advice. I was afraid somebody would tell me that bitter truth. The groom is an amateur photographer himself and he will understand a) the limitations of my equipment and b) the possibility of breaking up the group picture in 2. Oh well...</p>

<p>I have a wedding coming up this week and I am a little worried about the group pictures. I scoutted the location and it is a small open air theater with four rows of "seats" (actually double height steps made of concrete) arranged in a semi-circle of about 7 meter radius. Since it is a large group, some 100 people, and I'll be using an 18 mm lens in DX format (~76° angle of view - I don't have wider), I'll locate the camera as back as possible, i.e. the center of the circle. The semi-circle looks south-west-south and the picture will be at 6 pm, so I'll have the sun on the left of the camera, and I can choose putting the people so the sun is mostly on their right but at their backs, or hitting them on the right of their faces.<br>

Now the question: can I make do with only one SB-600 to light up the faces, or do I need two? If using only one, I was planning to put it a meter or two to the right of the camera. If I need two SB-600: what is the best arrangement?<br>

Thanks a lot in advance!</p>

<p>Oh, nooooo! I only have a regular D80!!! why? oh, why?</p>

<p>Chris, I'm in exactly in your situation, except that it is not my first wedding, but my 15th or so. The 18-200 VR from Nikon is all you <em>need</em>, but it is desirable if you had at least a 50 mm f/1,8 or something like that for the ceremony, where flash might be allowed but it is not really nice to use. Besides, learning to use such a lens will extend your capabilities.<br>

Another thing that you must have is a good flash. At least an SB-600. Learn how to use it before the big day. Take plenty of batteries and memory cards; both have to be enough for at least twice the shots that you have in mind to make.</p>

 

<p>Colleen, I see your point and to some extent I agree, but if I understood correctly the OP is not asking for too much. A professional needs some "space" to work and do his/her thing. I, as a guest, look very much after the hired professional and try not to get in his way, particularly in the group pictures, when the subjects don't know which camera to look at. The photographer has to be flexible and adapt, yes, but also assertive at some points about he accomplishing a task. Unlike the guests, he is not there to go home happy that he got the pictures for free (many guests always think that they'll have to pay to get THAT picture, so they sneak in and take advantage), but to make pictures for the B&G. That sets the professional appart from guests, and should be let alone when working.</p>

<p>John, that is what I had in mind. The church has 20 rows of seats in two blocks of 10 and 10, so I can stay in between the two blocks and get shots from the bride with the father and then turn around and shoot at the groom. Then go to the right side, quickly walk to the front and get pictures when the father gives the bride away and when B&G meet. I talked to the couple and they liked it. Afterwards, at some point during the ceremony, I'll get pictures of them standing in front of the altar.<br>

Jerry, my father is about 14000 km away. He'll need the Hubble telescope to do this wedding =)<br>

David, thanks! I don't speak English natively so I didn't know the term.</p>

<p>Thanks everybody for the suggestions. Today we had a try at a park with some nice lighting and we talked about the entrance to the church, and we agreed that I'll wait for her middle way of the isle to get a shot when she enters, and also the groom's face (he told me he will probably cry). After she passes, I'll get some picture of her going towards the groom, and then move to the front for most of the ceremony. Kind of like a mixture of all your ideas.</p>

<p>Hi, first question ever in the wedding forum, so be gentle...<br />My father is a professional photographer, and I have been his second for at least 10 weddings, and did on my own some more. However, I stayed away from the business for a while and just embraced it as a hobby, but after seeing the results a friend of mine asked me to cover his wedding. I pretty much have the technical side (I'm talking about equipment) covered, with two Nikon D80, two SB-600 with cable release, diffusers and such, a 18-200 VR (for outdoors), a 50 f/1,4 and a 90 f/2,8 lens, a wide angle, 22 Gb in SD cards and enough bateries to electrocute a whale or two.<br />I have been through wedding albums and pictures in the net and got plenty of ideas, but one question sprung to mind yesterday evening: how do you photograph the bride when she enters the church? I mean, do you stay in front of her (and between her and the groom)? or behind? or what?! I spoke to the B&G and set the expectations, I scouted the church and the party place, and feel confident about when and how to use the flash (the priest in the church is cool with it), which lens, etc., but this particular point keeps me nervous. I don't want to be conspicuous, so please let me know 1 or 5 advices for this.<br />Thanks in advance!</p>

<p>Hi Nataliya,<br>

and? how did it go? and what did you agree in the end?<br>

let us know!</p>