Why I NEVER use ND Filters With Drone Cameras

[Mavikhan]

 

[herein2021]

Light rays don't scale with sensor size. The assertion that most lenses are designed to be sharpest at f/8-11 is not applicable to small sensors and lenses designed for them, with or w/o with irises. The ray angles become more severe, sooner. Herein2021 you're a gaslighting windbag. And just like a troll with multiple personalities, keep talking to yourself. Eagle928 I called you out for spreading false information, so that makes me a hater? Honestly, where do you (two? Same troll?) find enough time in the day for this nonsense?

This is coming from someone who actually said you would use an ND filter to get sharper images, and someone who says facts are too much to read so you skip to the end and jump straight into making categorically false statements?

Show me a single article from any reputable source that has ND filters on their list of things to use to get sharper images. Since my posts were too much to read its clear you missed the part where I said the diffraction difference in real world applications in this particular use case is so negligible that using an ND filter to counter them would not outweigh the other problems ND filters cause. You have yet to even attempt to identify from the images above which ones were shot at F11...why? because you can't.

You are really stuck on this diffraction topic when the proper way to get the sharpest images from any lens (for photography) is simply shoot at it's sharpest aperture (whatever that may be) and raise the shutter speed until the image is properly exposed. For video, F11 IMO is a perfectly good substitute for dealing with the problems that ND filters cause.

 

[robport]

I do some commercial real estate and am usually required, by the customer, to keep my aperture wide open for his shots and provide him with raw pictures. I use an ND filter in the winter, with the sun low, on either bright blue sky days or with haze in front of the sun, especially when looking south. If I don't use one, the southern facing shots are blown out and look unfocused (and I won't get paid).

 

[Eagle928]

I do some commercial real estate and am usually required, by the customer, to keep my aperture wide open for his shots and provide him with raw pictures. I use an ND filter in the winter, with the sun low, on either bright blue sky days or with haze in front of the sun, especially when looking south. If I don't use one, the southern facing shots are blown out and look unfocused (and I won't get paid).

I would think the customer would be more concerned about getting a good shot. I wonder if he does the colorizing/editing himself or sends it out and that's what the 3rd party wants.

 

[robport]

I would think the customer would be more concerned about getting a good shot. I wonder if he does the colorizing/editing himself or sends it out and that's what the 3rd party wants.

I give him a good shot, just have to drop the light enough to get it in the range of shutter speeds the drone can handle. This company is very tight with their setups. They even make me take inside shots at F/8 and I haven't been able to convince them otherwise. I use a tripod and an android app to trigger the camera which is fine for structure, but still allows for motion blur if anyone walks by.

 

[Eagle928]

I give him a good shot, just have to drop the light enough to get it in the range of shutter speeds the drone can handle. This company is very tight with their setups. They even make me take inside shots at F/8 and I haven't been able to convince them otherwise. I use a tripod and an android app to trigger the camera which is fine for structure, but still allows for motion blur if anyone walks by.

I guess the bottom line is the customer gets what the customer wants since they are paying for it. Still a bit of a head scratcher though.

It must be frustrating for you.

 

[robport]

I can put up with some minor inconveniences for an otherwise understanding and paying customer with an emphasis on "paying". Commercial real estate knows what they want, you know what they are willing to pay and they pay quickly if you meet their requirements (even if they don't make sense, they take responsibility for it). You never know what you will get with residential though. You may shoot multiple times because, well, I actually wanted this other thing that I didn't tell you about...and you may or may not get paid for reshoots, usually not.

 

[Mike Mas]

Thanks - Great report with some good stuff, however you're in error concerning the use of filters and over-working the gimbal with these tiny filters on the nose of the camera. In fact, on the Osmo Pocket, DJI supplies a removable magnetic wide angle lens for the camera. Myself, I seldom use ND filters but I do use Polarize filters constantly, and been doing so professionally for decades and never lost a motor or even got a gimbal warning.

Keep in mind, the gimbal is going through constant variable loads all the time especially when the blunt end of the camera is sitting at a 45 degree angle to flight when you cruising 20-40 mph. During this and other events, the motors are exposed to variable and constant loading during flight.

Regards - Mike

 

[tuxontodd]

With the Evo I had props in the shot way too many times. I wish Autel designed it better. It wasn't until I used ND filters and got to the appropriate frame rate did the problem drastically diminish. Flying really slow and tilting the camera down isn't always options and BS ones at that.

 

[Lough Gur]

I don't know all the science that's been mentioned above, but I will add these thoughts:

1. I have a postal scale that reads down to 1 gram. Neither the UV filter that came with my EVO I, nor the ND/CPL I use, register even 1 gram. I don't believe there's any additional load on the gimbel motor.
2. It's not another lens. It's replacing the UV filter that came on the gimbal.
3. I use a ND/CPL because it will allow the camera to operate in the correct exposure range, rather than try to fight over-exposure. Also, the CPL isn't just for water glare. Just as on any SLR camera, it provides more vibrant colors.
4. I'm not sure when you shopped prices, but they're not expensive at all. Anybody who paid a thousand dollars or more on a drone shouldn't have a problem increasing the drones ability by spending a few extra bucks.
5. This may not apply to EVO II users, but an EVO I flying forward at even moderate speed has the props in the video. An ND filter adjusts the blur to virtually eliminate that issue.
6. Setup time? 10 seconds if I really need to change it for the conditions (usually not). Camera modification ("breaking the original factory sealed filter")? I think that's grasping at straws.

In summary, and respectfully, I'm of the exact opposite view. There is no reason NOT to use an ND filter.

 

[Tomaso]

WOW. That's a lot of information. I still like using them, especially on glare-filled 1-way shots, using ND polarizing filters really helps.

 

[Mark Kuzio]

As a novice to drone photography and videography I appreciate all of your opinions and will take what everyone says and try it out for myself. After saying that I do want to add that I appreciate Herein2021's arguments and his concerted effort to stay with this conversation and trying to back it up with more detailed information. Say what you will but if you know quite a bit about this subject you should be able to explain yourself with more than a comment or a couple of sentences.
In my case I do use ND filters at times on my EVOP2 but honestly I do it because others say to do it. This discussion will lead me to experiment more on my own and to be more methodical about it. I look forward to that.

 

[Wiscokid]

I don’t use ND filters and not because I think they would help, but only having a drone for a year, I’m an amateur at best. I’m still amazed to achieve the quality I do get from my EVO2 and as a bonus my friends seem impressed. I think you make a good points.

It is amusing but then becomes old to see many YouTube experts and on forums appear to trip over themself in effort to make money on promotion or referrals. It is refreshing to hear a professional give his seemingly unbiased opinion here to suggest to focus on better uses of my time and money. Reading a negative comment like that was a waste and I always question the motive. Like soldiers quickly popping their head from a foxhole then fire a short burst or lob a clever insult or two yet lacking helpful information to back it up.

I like to see more honest opinions out there without fear of snipers but like everything there may politics involved. Thanks for the post, herein2021. I’ll definitely apply some of that information on my next flight and see for myself.

 

[JBR LIFE Media]

You lost me at 'drones cannot make blurry waterfalls.' I'm happy to share plenty of slow-shutter shots if you like.

Sorry chap, but I believe you're missing the point altogether here. Many of us have personally tested motion blur effect with all of our drones, using ND filters and without, throwing shutter angle out the window, and then dialing in again for proper comparison.

Either your monitor is lying to you, or perhaps you just cannot see it, but there's definitely flicker in the brighter daylight non-ND filter scenes, nothing to do with rate conformity at all. Cameras are cameras. Your 20mp drone sensor works on the same principals as your other cameras. ND filters have a place, and as already stated, not all places.

As for the part about ruining your lens or killing the gimbal motors, meh...I disagree again. If you're not competent enough to handle a simple filter swap, you have no business flying anything, all the way down to a simple kite. ND filters aren't known to be 'drone killers'.

 

[herein2021]

@Tomaso @Mark Kuzio @Lough Gur @Wiscokid I certainly respect other people's opinions and encourage every single person to perform their own tests to see what works and doesn't work for them, I like discussions like this because it at least makes people put some real thought into the equipment they are using and the reasons for it.

I believe many people that use ND filters with their drones would truly be surprised if they left the ND filter off and used just the Aperture and Shutter speed to control the exposure......I think they would find it's impossible to tell when the ND filter was used and when it was not (this is assuming of course the ND filter is not adding some kind of color cast to the footage).

I don't know all the science that's been mentioned above, but I will add these thoughts:

1. I have a postal scale that reads down to 1 gram. Neither the UV filter that came with my EVO I, nor the ND/CPL I use, register even 1 gram. I don't believe there's any additional load on the gimbel motor.
2. It's not another lens. It's replacing the UV filter that came on the gimbal.
3. I use a ND/CPL because it will allow the camera to operate in the correct exposure range, rather than try to fight over-exposure. Also, the CPL isn't just for water glare. Just as on any SLR camera, it provides more vibrant colors.
4. I'm not sure when you shopped prices, but they're not expensive at all. Anybody who paid a thousand dollars or more on a drone shouldn't have a problem increasing the drones ability by spending a few extra bucks.
5. This may not apply to EVO II users, but an EVO I flying forward at even moderate speed has the props in the video. An ND filter adjusts the blur to virtually eliminate that issue.
6. Setup time? 10 seconds if I really need to change it for the conditions (usually not). Camera modification ("breaking the original factory sealed filter")? I think that's grasping at straws.

In summary, and respectfully, I'm of the exact opposite view. There is no reason NOT to use an ND filter.

I'm glad they are working out for you and certainly welcome opposing opinions. From your perspective they are providing some value and since it is your drone that's all that matters; like I've mentioned multiple times this entire thread was simply to provide a different perspective from what you will ever hear from the YouTubbers and websites with their affiliate links to ND filters. My perspective is from shooting everything from weddings to TV commercials...and having never once used an ND filter for the drones. On the ground...absolutely...in the air...never.

But sure lets go through your list:

1 - There are still threads to this day even on this forum where users have gimbal calibration issues after switching to an ND filter and as I mentioned, I was mainly referring to the old slip on filters which is why I never used them when I was first starting out with drones....7yrs and hundreds of commercial jobs later I've never once needed them or had a client notice the difference.

2 - I was referring to the slip on filters which was how they used to be offered for drone cameras. Modern ones replace the UV filters but they are still another piece of glass (or plastic) that may have been built to the same quality standards as the original.....or it may not have. ND filters are notorious for causing undesirable issues in the final footage.

3 - I've never had a problem with any drone since 2014 achieving the proper exposure without an ND filter; that's what the Aperture and shutter speed are for. CPL filters is another topic for another day but if you want more vibrant colors simply add saturation in post processing.

4 - When you are running a business every penny spent on something that you deem has no added value to the footage you are producing for a client is an unreasonable cost. Freewell ND filter sets are $130.00....this is cheap compared to plenty of other things (i.e. my cinema camera ND filters were over $600.00, and I have camera lenses alone that cost more than the entire EVO II 6K), but expensive to someone who has decided they provide no added benefit to the image quality.

5 - The props are not visible in the EVO II 6K's footage even when tilting the gimbal 30 degrees up. Every drone I have flown in the past had the props visible in certain situations; to counter this I simply adjusted the camera tilt angle; never had an issue. For commercial footage there's no way I would ever allow props in the footage; blurred or not it would simply not be acceptable.

6 - I believe in simple....very simple. The equipment, accessories, and cameras are already complex enough; when you are on a set if it can go wrong it will go wrong. So yes, to me setup time is always something I factor in. Its easy to say when you are sitting in a park filming some trees that setting up an ND filter is easy; but try that same thing when shooting a wedding and running 3 different cameras in addition to the drone, synching with the wedding coordinator, waiting for those critical shots and you need the drone in the air for those few critical seconds as the bride arrives at the venue. Figuring out if the right ND filter is on the drone is the last thing I'm going to want to deal with.

Same thing goes for breaking the seal on the factory UV filter. The last thing you want to see when you land the drone is a dust spot on the lens or behind the lens. I live in Florida where everything is very dusty and sandy; even my regular camera bodies and lenses I have to send in for professional cleaning; I've never had any dust or dirt get behind the UV filter of the drones and I've also never taken them off.

 

[herein2021]

You lost me at 'drones cannot make blurry waterfalls.' I'm happy to share plenty of slow-shutter shots if you like.

Sorry chap, but I believe you're missing the point altogether here. Many of us have personally tested motion blur effect with all of our drones, using ND filters and without, throwing shutter angle out the window, and then dialing in again for proper comparison.

Either your monitor is lying to you, or perhaps you just cannot see it, but there's definitely flicker in the brighter daylight non-ND filter scenes, nothing to do with rate conformity at all. Cameras are cameras. Your 20mp drone sensor works on the same principals as your other cameras. ND filters have a place, and as already stated, not all places.

As for the part about ruining your lens or killing the gimbal motors, meh...I disagree again. If you're not competent enough to handle a simple filter swap, you have no business flying anything, all the way down to a simple kite. ND filters aren't known to be 'drone killers'.

Of course a drone can shoot at any shutter speed you set it to....I never said they can't...what I said was you won't get good results with it. By good results I mean commercially viable that you can sell. A blurry waterfall or smooth water that looks good on Instagram is a far cry from something you will see in an art gallery or a stock footage site.

To get commercially viable results the camera has to be so still that even the vibration from the mirror in DSLRs can affect it; no way will a drone be able to replicate that. If you are just taking waterfall pictures for Instagram or Facebook then by all means that can be accomplished with a drone.

No, most people have not done motion blur tests for themselves and reached their own conclusions, most have simply done what YouTube told them to do. Also, I already mentioned that motion blur can be easily added back in post using your NLE if it concerns you that much.

If you want to post waterfalls on Instagram or Facebook with a slow shutter speed, or you really feel like you are missing out on proper motion blur in your drone footage that you cannot add back in via your NLE then by all means use ND filters....this thread though is about why I specifically never have.

 

[RSands1]

I see a lot of posts regarding ND filters for people's drone cameras and each time I ask myself why; why are people buying ND filters for their drone cameras, risking their gimbal motors, potentially damaging their camera lens, etc. etc. for an almost imperceptible amount of additional motion blur if any at all. I have never used an ND filter on any drone that I have owned and I have worked hundreds of projects for paying customers over the years; not a single one has said my footage doesn't have the proper motion blur or asked for a reshoot or a refund because they could tell I didn't have an ND filter on my drone. Sure, if you are shooting the next Hollywood blockbuster and using hexacopters to lift $100K worth of cinema cameras into the air then an ND filter just makes sense.....but for Youtube, Instagram, Vimeo; where your video will probably most commonly be viewed at 320P on a 5" cell phone screen? It makes no sense at all to me.

I know a lot of people use ND filters with their drone cameras but in my opinion I think a lot of people use them just because they have read somewhere that they are supposed to use them based on the 180 degree shutter angle rule (i.e. shutter speed "should" be 2x the frame rate). But if you study the reasons why that rule came about you may reach the same conclusion that I did; which is that it doesn't make sense for drone footage.

The shutter angle/shutter speed rule is meant to reduce or eliminate flicker in certain scenarios such as at night under street lights. Well when you think about it how often is a drone in that situation? The rule is also meant to ensure that there is the "proper" amount of motion blur during fast camera movements; once again, how often is a drone close enough to an object for it to matter? So what about fast moving objects other than the drone.....once again, how often is the drone close enough to that object for the motion blur difference to really be noticeable? And if you still want that barely noticeable motion blur that you feel like you are missing...it takes seconds to add it from within your NLE as you are editing the video.

So if there's not much benefit to using ND filters on drones are there any downsides? Sure there are:

• Another Lens - ND filters are another lens between the camera and the scene which means its another thing that can get smudged, dirty or dusty, and can affect the incoming quality of light
• Image Degradation - Cheap ND filters can add a color cast, corner softness, chromatic aberration, and other problems to the image the camera records. Even the most expensive ND filters out there tend to add a slightly green cast.
• Gimbal Motor Burnout - This was the main reason I chose not to use ND filters years ago. Back then they were heavy and not designed for drones. People were reporting their gimbal motors burning out trying to support the additional weight of the ND filter on the front of the camera. What may feel nearly weightless to humans is still an additional load on the gimbal motor that was not accounted for in the original design of the drone's gimbal motors.
• Cost - ND filter sets for drones are not cheap, they are easy to break and to lose and offer marginal if any benefit to the actual footage. Drones have a very limited lifespan (the avg is 3yrs), so almost every accessory that you buy for one is wasted if you crash it or get a new drone.
• Setup Time - They add to the drone setup time. You have to figure out the proper ND filter based on the current ambient lighting situation and there's always the chance it could change drastically while you are in the air (i.e. the sun goes behind heavy cloud cover or you fly beneath tree cover).
• Camera Modification - If the ND filter has to replace the UV filter you are breaking the original factory sealed filter which will increase the chances of getting dirt, moisture, and other undesirables behind the lens. The better solutions slip over the UV filter....but then there's the weight problem.

So after looking at all of the pros and cons I personally just ignore the shutter angle / shutter speed rules and increase my shutter speed as needed to properly expose the scene. With a drone like the EVO II 6K at F11 ISO 100 I can practically point it at the sun and still not be much over 1/200s.

Another thing people then frequently say is..."but they've seen xyz's footage on YouTube and it looks like it is stuttering....if the YouTuber had ND filters and had properly followed the 180 degree shutter angle rule their footage would not have stuttered and been choppy". This is another common misconception; the shutter speed does not make the footage stutter, the typical cause of stuttering YouTube footage is due to whoever shot the footage incorrectly conforming the footage in post to the timeline framerate they intended to render to. Many times people shoot at 60FPS then try to export the timeline to 24FPS.....without properly configuring their NLE to account for the fact that 24FPS is not 50% of 60FPS which brings me to my next point which is that I don't understand why people shoot in 24FPS....but that's another topic/rant for a different day.

My simple advice to get the best footage out of these drones in bright daylight; shoot at 60FPS or 30FPS, use a 30FPS timeline (29.97FPS), render your footage at 30FPS (29.97FPS), push the F stop to F11 and keep the ISO at 100, then use whatever shutter speed is needed to properly expose the footage and leave the ND filters to the regular cameras or the Hollywood blockbusters. BTW, I have absolutely nothing against ND filters themselves, I use them nearly daily with all of my other cameras to control the shutter speed either for video or for photography; its just that when it comes to drones I can't think of a single use case where they would provide any value whatsoever.

There are just too many bad bullet posts here so I'll just say - I'm a professional photographer - more motion picture than stills but many stills as well - for 45 years. I read this toxic post and hope that there are more people than not here that will study the problems with fast shutter speeds when shooting with out of focus foregrounds (FG) as it pertains to video that will be incorporate with feature work, i.e. narrative, promos or even docs. The main issue w/o using an ND is strobing and, as mentioned, in some circumstances, deep focus.. Not the night-time strobing of out of sync street lights, etc, but fast shutter speed issues that are seen with a nominal speed BG and a fast speed FG.

As far as 'bad bullet posts' I am referring to a laziness of procedure that would probably only affect non-professionals: smudges on glass, non-existent 'breaking of seals (???)' and out of balance gimbals. I consistantly use an ND .60 for day/ext unless, as a previous poster mentions, shooting with snow in the shot, just to keep the shutter speed at the appropriate relationship to frame rate.

Of course, the assumption that the 'hater of NDs' makes is that all shots with a drone are far-away from the subject. If they only shoot in that realm then, yes, they are good with a much too small aperture (lens quality, for the most part, break up after 2 stops open from max aperture). The ridiculous example of a 2D image (railroad tracks from above!), well, as I reference, can be shot at any of the exposure triangle parameters (shutter speed/ISO/f-stop), but move the camera along that plane and you will see an unaccep[table amount of strobing at a shorter shutter speed (anything above 1/60 depending on the distance away from subject).

Newbies and learners, PLEASE be advised that the opinions that are spoke as rote by this person are NOT standard practices of professional photography - motion picture-wise, that is. It is just one person's opinion.

 

[RSands1]

I see a lot of posts regarding ND filters for people's drone cameras and each time I ask myself why; why are people buying ND filters for their drone cameras, risking their gimbal motors, potentially damaging their camera lens, etc. etc. for an almost imperceptible amount of additional motion blur if any at all. I have never used an ND filter on any drone that I have owned and I have worked hundreds of projects for paying customers over the years; not a single one has said my footage doesn't have the proper motion blur or asked for a reshoot or a refund because they could tell I didn't have an ND filter on my drone. Sure, if you are shooting the next Hollywood blockbuster and using hexacopters to lift $100K worth of cinema cameras into the air then an ND filter just makes sense.....but for Youtube, Instagram, Vimeo; where your video will probably most commonly be viewed at 320P on a 5" cell phone screen? It makes no sense at all to me.

I know a lot of people use ND filters with their drone cameras but in my opinion I think a lot of people use them just because they have read somewhere that they are supposed to use them based on the 180 degree shutter angle rule (i.e. shutter speed "should" be 2x the frame rate). But if you study the reasons why that rule came about you may reach the same conclusion that I did; which is that it doesn't make sense for drone footage.

The shutter angle/shutter speed rule is meant to reduce or eliminate flicker in certain scenarios such as at night under street lights. Well when you think about it how often is a drone in that situation? The rule is also meant to ensure that there is the "proper" amount of motion blur during fast camera movements; once again, how often is a drone close enough to an object for it to matter? So what about fast moving objects other than the drone.....once again, how often is the drone close enough to that object for the motion blur difference to really be noticeable? And if you still want that barely noticeable motion blur that you feel like you are missing...it takes seconds to add it from within your NLE as you are editing the video.

So if there's not much benefit to using ND filters on drones are there any downsides? Sure there are:

• Another Lens - ND filters are another lens between the camera and the scene which means its another thing that can get smudged, dirty or dusty, and can affect the incoming quality of light
• Image Degradation - Cheap ND filters can add a color cast, corner softness, chromatic aberration, and other problems to the image the camera records. Even the most expensive ND filters out there tend to add a slightly green cast.
• Gimbal Motor Burnout - This was the main reason I chose not to use ND filters years ago. Back then they were heavy and not designed for drones. People were reporting their gimbal motors burning out trying to support the additional weight of the ND filter on the front of the camera. What may feel nearly weightless to humans is still an additional load on the gimbal motor that was not accounted for in the original design of the drone's gimbal motors.
• Cost - ND filter sets for drones are not cheap, they are easy to break and to lose and offer marginal if any benefit to the actual footage. Drones have a very limited lifespan (the avg is 3yrs), so almost every accessory that you buy for one is wasted if you crash it or get a new drone.
• Setup Time - They add to the drone setup time. You have to figure out the proper ND filter based on the current ambient lighting situation and there's always the chance it could change drastically while you are in the air (i.e. the sun goes behind heavy cloud cover or you fly beneath tree cover).
• Camera Modification - If the ND filter has to replace the UV filter you are breaking the original factory sealed filter which will increase the chances of getting dirt, moisture, and other undesirables behind the lens. The better solutions slip over the UV filter....but then there's the weight problem.

So after looking at all of the pros and cons I personally just ignore the shutter angle / shutter speed rules and increase my shutter speed as needed to properly expose the scene. With a drone like the EVO II 6K at F11 ISO 100 I can practically point it at the sun and still not be much over 1/200s.

Another thing people then frequently say is..."but they've seen xyz's footage on YouTube and it looks like it is stuttering....if the YouTuber had ND filters and had properly followed the 180 degree shutter angle rule their footage would not have stuttered and been choppy". This is another common misconception; the shutter speed does not make the footage stutter, the typical cause of stuttering YouTube footage is due to whoever shot the footage incorrectly conforming the footage in post to the timeline framerate they intended to render to. Many times people shoot at 60FPS then try to export the timeline to 24FPS.....without properly configuring their NLE to account for the fact that 24FPS is not 50% of 60FPS which brings me to my next point which is that I don't understand why people shoot in 24FPS....but that's another topic/rant for a different day.

My simple advice to get the best footage out of these drones in bright daylight; shoot at 60FPS or 30FPS, use a 30FPS timeline (29.97FPS), render your footage at 30FPS (29.97FPS), push the F stop to F11 and keep the ISO at 100, then use whatever shutter speed is needed to properly expose the footage and leave the ND filters to the regular cameras or the Hollywood blockbusters. BTW, I have absolutely nothing against ND filters themselves, I use them nearly daily with all of my other cameras to control the shutter speed either for video or for photography; its just that when it comes to drones I can't think of a single use case where they would provide any value whatsoever.

Your bullet points are absolutely, well, lazy. 'Clean the glass'? 'Softness?. If you're a 'pro' then you are certainly the most lazy pro. You'd be fired on the spot if you had to work with any client (DPs included) who knew what was proper.

I want to speak out because there are many novices here that look to experience to guide them. It seems that you'd be somewhat correct if your footage was only from afar with no foreground (FG). If, in fact, there IS FG, the (manual focus) being on the BG and, if by your standards, the FG will STROBE at anything shorter than 1/50 or 1/60 shutter speed. Your parameters are probably working great for you in your limited shooting situations but have ZERO to do with real world applications when lighting, camera speed and FG/BG situations change at the client's whim.

So, yes, be happy with your thoughts on NDs but be damned when you fester information that is supposed to work for all situations and speaking as if they are truth..

 

[RSands1]

Sensor size has nothing to do with the way a camera and lens operates so basically in lieu of any actual facts or evidence to the contrary that's all you can come up with. Since diffraction is such a "strong argument" for ND filters you should have no problems picking the images below that were shot at F11.

I even made it easy....same time of day, same distance from subject, and a scene with plenty of detail in the tracks and rocks.

View attachment 9885View attachment 9886View attachment 9887View attachment 9888View attachment 9889

This is by far the most uninformed example of DOF. I mean, shooting STRAIGHT DOWN to a flat subject!!??? You must think people are pretty dumb.

 

[tvwxman]

Sensor size has nothing to do with the way a camera and lens operates so basically in lieu of any actual facts or evidence to the contrary that's all you can come up with. Since diffraction is such a "strong argument" for ND filters you should have no problems picking the images below that were shot at F11.

I even made it easy....same time of day, same distance from subject, and a scene with plenty of detail in the tracks and rocks.

View attachment 9885View attachment 9886View attachment 9887View attachment 9888View attachment 9889

Great eye test, ha! Subjectively I liked #4 the least. Maybe it's just because it had a slightly bluer cast than the others, or perhaps something else on a subconscious level? Can you reveal what the settings were on each of these? Thanks!