Abisko 2016 pt. 2

Upon wakening up from a freezing night I had decided upon a new valley to try to reach. I got up rather early and began the hike. After a few kilometers I reached another beautiful river and brought out my tripod and ND-filter to try some long exposures.

dsc_8327

dsc_8329

dsc_8331

My conclusion after using the 10 stop ND filter more and more is that it really is overkill in most cases. Sure, if you want to abstract something completely and get an other-wordly effect, then it may be used; if you instead just want to capture some of that movement and add dynamics to a landscape image, than I do think a substantially shorter shutter speed would be more adequate. Since I want everything to be in focus I am forced to use at the veyr least f/8, often leaving me at the max 30 sec shutter speed. I am considering trying a high quality polarizer next time.

dsc_8346

dsc_8376

dsc_8377

As I got higher and higher up in altitude, the wind started picking up more and more. Not to mention the constant drizzling of rain that went up and down in intensity.

/Martin

6 thoughts on “Abisko 2016 pt. 2

  1. Having read your later posts this sounds like not a great camping trip but some good lessons learned along the way!
    I agree with your conclusions regarding the 10 stop filter. I really like the effect it creates and enjoy experimenting but I feel it’s best suited to minimal/abstract work. Shorter shutter speeds (but not too short) convey the impression of movement better – the 10 stopper tends to go so far as to eliminate movement, creating very still images.

      • Yes, quite a lot. They’re great for enhancing colour by reducing reflections but they’re also pretty good at cutting through haze; it’s difficult to tell without actually seeing it for yourself but I think the colours of the hillside in your penultimate picture would have been richer with a polariser.
        As they effectively cut out some light, a slightly longer shutter speed is needed; often that’s enough to get the ‘right’ amount of movement without having to add low level NDs thus keeping set up simpler. The other advantage is that they will either reduce or enhance reflections depending on how you use them – I think you’d find one hugely beneficial for the sort of images in this post.

      • I have only used one sparesly with a 50mm a while back, but never with something as wide as my 16-35mm lens. I hear there can be a problem with a blue gradient over the sky. I might be getting one for my 35mm prime at least. It’s the same filter size as the 85mm.

      • I use one with my 16-35mm; can’t say I’ve experienced a problem with a blue gradient – my biggest problem is being too lazy to remove the UV filter first so the frame of the polariser shows up in the corners like really bad vignetting. An easily solved problem!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s