Hello again. I was just wondering if anyone knew the answer to a question I have about putting a filter on the H1.

I got a Tiffen Haze-1 UV filter and just put it on my camera, then went out to shoot a minute or so of the full moon. When I pointed the camera to the moon in the viewfinder I saw a bunch of reflections of the moon bouncing around, almost like a glare. I know that the filter is causing this because I can tell that the brightness of the moon is creating these images but I don't know why this is happening. Isn't the filter supposed to enhance the image? And why would a glass filter create a glare like that?

Please let me know what I can do about this...

Anthony,
Filters can cause this as well as issues in the Lens itself. Try turning off the OIS and see if it is part of the problem. I find I take off filters more than I put them on when in situations where the light source is in the shot. The physical gap between the filter and the front element can allow optical reflections which are annoying. This is why some people don't like zoom lenses with high numbers of optical elements which can create issues like this. Sometimes you have to use a different lens set up to get the shot you want. HTH

Anthony,

Adding to what Daniel has said, filters can be counted as just another lens element and the more u have of them in front of the sensor, the more prone to flare is the image. I also remove the filters if I see flare within the frame.

That said, IS will not contribute to flare though it will contribute to the "jumping around" within the frame. I use B+W MRC 010 filters for all my photography and video lenses. It is a superb choice and will definitely surpass the Tiffen which I think is mono-coated or uncoated.

Cheers

WeeHan

Thanks guys. So now I'm just confused about when I SHOULD use the filter... haha Sorry I'm a newb to all this!

Hi Anthony,
I too suffer the same and I guess the fact that more experieced users have in the past found the same and infact still do means that even they have to adjust to the siutations as they arise.
To help with your confusion - do as they say - change the set up as you go until you are getting the best you can get - I am exactly the same.
I unfortunately suffer with memorising instructions and have to go through a variety of adjustments until I see what I like. Experts would call me tedious - and often times I fail to resolve what I am failing in - but keep trying...

Dave

Anthony,
regarding your question about shooting the moon, I don't believe you achieve anything by applying any filter! Night shots should be done with the bare lens and with the right presets/settings.
I only use filters in situations where I need one, like polarizations in sunny area like snow and beach conditions. And ND's to adjust the amont of light to help me get the appropriate exposure in daylight. I also use an uv-filter in run and gun situations to protect the front lens glass in case of bad things happened!
Here's a link to a thread I had in the uwol-section, where you can view a full moon shot both with 20x HD lens and a 300mm f4.0 ef-lens:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=797583&postcount=16
This is shoot with the bare lens, IS turned off, manual focus ON.

Hello again. I was just wondering if anyone knew the answer to a question I have about putting a filter on the H1.

I got a Tiffen Haze-1 UV filter and just put it on my camera, then went out to shoot a minute or so of the full moon. When I pointed the camera to the moon in the viewfinder I saw a bunch of reflections of the moon bouncing around, almost like a glare. I know that the filter is causing this because I can tell that the brightness of the moon is creating these images but I don't know why this is happening. Isn't the filter supposed to enhance the image? And why would a glass filter create a glare like that?

Please let me know what I can do about this...

Anthony,

Reflections can be caused by errant light "bouncing" around in your lens. The more likely cause is that the filter you purchased is not multi coated or not coated to the spec of your lens. To ensure wether it is the filter or not, do a control image of shooting the same scene without a filter.

Also, B+W MRC filters are coated 8 times on both sides and therefore reduce the incidence of reflections off of the CCDs. All CCDs are slightly reflective due to the thier nature and therefore can cause CA as well as the camera actually imaging the reflected image on the backside of the filter. Therefore it is important to buy glass (both the lenses and filters) that are coated properly. In video, the lens isn't much of a choice but the filter you use is. All B+W filters exceed HD spec and will work well for this application.

http://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=671&IID=5674

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Per- That shot of the moon is very impressive. It looks like it is like yellow or light orange or something. Good stuff.

I guess the easiest way to figure all this stuff out is to just go out and shoot. I need a handbook on all these terms! haha I've been reading the instruction manual a lot but some of the stuff I still don't understand what to use it for. I just wish there was a glossary at the back so bad!

Anyway, I'll just have to tap into the information on this site I guess. I do have another question:

When you start messing with camera settings manually(aperture,focus,color,gain,etc), what is it that you are trying to do? I mean I know that you would change stuff like that to get the shot you want, but what are some things to look for to know if your shot isn't "good enough"? Or what are some signs that you might need to change the aperature or gain? These are the some of the things that I have yet to really learn about and I want to learn so bad I just don't know how!

Thanks, all your help is greately appreciated.

Dear Anthony,

First, I recommend that you learn the "Gain" on the XL H1.

This is actually easy.

Put a blank tape in the XL H1.

Set up the camera.

Start recording, and talk in to the microphone as you record a relatively dark scene.

Start off with -3 gain.

Then go to 0 (not Auto).

Then +6, +12, etc. Record each for at least 10 seconds. Each time check out how it looks in your viewfinder (and monitor is you have one).

Then set the gain to "Auto".

Then stop recording capture your tape or play back the tape into a good monitor or television.

You may determine, by looking at your monitor that the -3 is too dark (but in brightly lit scenes, (with a properly adjusted camera) it will not be. (In other words, it may be too dark for this one test, but not for other times.)

The -3 gives you the best quality. You lose a little quality with each step up in gain. You will definitely see some noise at the highest gain.

Note: When just using the Canon viewfinder, the gain noise will be harder to see.

The gain is provided to allow you to capture a scene which would otherwise be too dark for the camera. The tradeoff is that some noise will be introduced.

Generally, we recommend that you never use "Auto Gain" as it will introduce noise when your camera needs more light, and the level of noise will change as the level of light changes.

In video, the lens isn't much of a choice but the filter you use is. All B+W filters exceed HD spec and will work well for this application.
Hmmm... reading that from a sale person don't convince me much! The original question from Anthony was shooting the moon with a filter or not. So will you recommend any filter for this use or not? I will say no, and I got some experience in the field.

Per Johan,

Maybe what Ryan was implying was the B+W will do a better job than the Tiffen under normal shooting conditions. I totally agree that shooting the moon will not justify having a UV filter on....unless you are in desert areas or near the beach where dust and saltspray can destroy the coatings on the lens.

Cheers

WeeHan

Anthony: With a last name like yours I would think that you'd know everything there is to know about filters - like genetic knowledge - kidding..

The advice above is good... no filters with video unless you want to create an effect, apply diffusion (which, by the way, can look really interesting with moon shots) or cut light (NDs)...

As for B+W (made, interestingly, by your namesake company) vs Tiffen, I have both and, to be honest, have never found a significant difference. When B+W filters were first introduced, they touted their water-glass polarizer, so I bought one and did side by side comparisons for an upcoming commercial (in 35mm) with my Tiffens, and couldn't really see any difference except that the B+W seemed colder, and the Tiffen seems to "dial in" some warmth when rotated... That can be important to know, but I couldn't see any significant resolution or refraction problems with one over the other.

I am not trying to push the use of a filter in every situation. Filters have thier time and place. I should have been clear that a filter is probably not the best application when shooting the moon unless you need protection on the lens. What I was saying is that if you are to use a filter, the B+W will definitely be better. There is a definite difference in the quality of glass between our filter and Tiffen. If you doubt this, go to a camera store and ask to see a Tiffen UV and a B+W UV. Place them on a white piece of paper. You will instantly see which is really clear.

In response to the polarizer discussion, B+W filters are 12x more effective at polarizing the light. This is measured by the extinction ratio of the filter. A B+W Polarizer features an extinction ratio of 374 vs Tiffen of around 31.

The extinction ratio is used to describe the efficiency with which the transmitted optical power is modulated through the filter. Extinction Ratio is the ratio of the power of a plane-polarized light that is transmitted through a polarizer placed in its path with its polarizing axis parallel to the beam's plane, as compared with the transmitted power when the polarizer's axis is perpendicular to the beam's plane.

Warmth of polarizers is a very subjective issue and is very dependent on the white balance of the camera, the angle of the light to the optical axis, the color balance of your monitor, the printer, and a myriad of other variables. As with most filters and shooting situations in general (except color and balance effects) a proper white balance should be performed once the filter is in place.

All things being equal, the choice is up to you and what looks good to you. I have owned many different brands of filter and they all have a different look to them. Technical quality is another issue.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Thanks all!

Dan- Great info, that's definitely something I needed to know, especially since that has been a problem for me so far while shooting with this camera. I guess I was confused because I thought the gain had something to do with audio?

Steve- haha yea I wish I had some sort of genetic knowledge... But I'm definitely not related to whoever that is, otherwise I would be laying around on a beach in the Caribbean all day long...

I think I'm just not gonna worry about the filters for the time being. I'm out in Colorado shooting in the mountains right now, and so far I'm pretty satisfied with some of the stuff I have gotten.

Oh! I forgot one more thing that has been bugging me! What is "ND"? It scared me a little because it kept popping up on the screen while filming and I couldn't figure out what it is!

Once again, thanks for all your time and help.

Anthony...

ND is Neutral Density. think of them as sunglasses for you lens.

If you're shooting outside...in bright sunlight...you should have at least one of the ND filters engaged. There are two...for different levels of (shading).

Without ND ...you will only get a very shallow DOF (depth of field)...because you will only be able to open the iris so far....

With ND engaged (or additional ND filters in a matte box)...you will be able to open the iris for more DOF....

I personally like to shoot closer to the end of the aperture of a lens...with lots of DOF...but that's just me.....you'll hear difference between DP's....

Anthony...

ND is Neutral Density. think of them as sunglasses for you lens.

If you're shooting outside...in bright sunlight...you should have at least one of the ND filters engaged. There are two...for different levels of (shading).

Without ND ...you will only get a very shallow DOF (depth of field)...because you will only be able to open the iris so far....

With ND engaged (or additional ND filters in a matte box)...you will be able to open the iris for more DOF....

I personally like to shoot closer to the end of the aperture of a lens...with lots of DOF...but that's just me.....you'll hear difference between DP's....

You have reversed the definition of Less and More DOF. Higher F Stops have more DOF Lower F Stops have Less DOF.

Hi.
A little clarification and explanation:
Without any ND filter you need to set the iris smaller and you will get a large DOF (depth of field). (However, don't go past about 8 or so with these small chip HD camcorders. Too small iris makes you losing sharpness.)

With ND engaged (or additional ND filters in a matte box) you can open the iris more for more shallow DOF (if you have light enough with the selected shutter time and gain.)

Unfortunately the aperture is a reciprocal number (like 1:2 or 1:8) and photographers usually omit the "1:" part of the number. This leads us to the strange fact that a larger number (like 8) has a smaller iris but "8" means technically that the diameter of the iris is 1:8 or 0.125 of the focal length of the lens.

The amount of light which can pass through an iris is proportional to the diameter squared which makes the exposure calculations harder to do.

Thats why you can double the exposure time from 1/60 to 1/30 and compensate by only change one f-stop from 1:1.4 to 1:2. (Where 1.4 is almost the square root of 2 etc.)

Good luck with your filming. But I'm quite sure you will need the ND filters if you have normal light in the mountains.

Make sure you clean your filters if they become dirty.

When using wide angle focal lengths; any dirt on the filter together with small iris will make the dirt clearly visible on the video!

Maybe you don't see it first but if you zoom it will look very annoying. Once you see it you will find it on all shots. This has ruined some nice shots for me in the beloved Kenya ...

Thanks Daniel...typo on my end....

Make sure you clean your filters if they become dirty.

When using wide angle focal lengths; any dirt on the filter together with small iris will make the dirt clearly visible on the video!

Maybe you don't see it first but if you zoom it will look very annoying. Once you see it you will find it on all shots. This has ruined some nice shots for me in the beloved Kenya ...

OFR Mist and Kimwipes are the preffered method for cleaning lenses and filters here at Schneider.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Allright thanks again. Hopefully I'll be able to figure out whatever you guys just said!

-Anthony

OFR Mist and Kimwipes are the preffered method for cleaning lenses and filters here at Schneider.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

I am surprised by this. From what I have read, while Kimwipes can be used to clean delicate surfaces, they are not recommened for cleaning optical surfaces, such as lenses, as they can scratch the optical surface. From personal experience, I always thought that Kimwipes were rough to the touch, not soft like lens cleaning tissue or cloth.

Ryan, I assume that you and Schneider know what they are doing, it just surprises me that something as rough as a Kimwipe would be recommened for cleaning an optical surface.

The following Wikipedia article discusses Kimwipes. Please refer to the section on Kimwipes near the bottom of the article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimwipes

Ahem, Kevin,

You've got it the wrong way round. Shallow depth of field is due to a large aperture. Deep depth of field caused by a smaller aperture.

Using the ND filters causes one to have to open up the stop, thereby LESSENING the depth of field.

Harry

I am surprised by this. From what I have read, while Kimwipes can be used to clean delicate surfaces, they are not recommened for cleaning optical surfaces, such as lenses, as they can scratch the optical surface. From personal experience, I always thought that Kimwipes were rough to the touch, not soft like lens cleaning tissue or cloth.

Ryan, I assume that you and Schneider know what they are doing, it just surprises me that something as rough as a Kimwipe would be recommened for cleaning an optical surface.

The following Wikipedia article discusses Kimwipes. Please refer to the section on Kimwipes near the bottom of the article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimwipes

Kimwipes are seemingly rougher to the touch but they grab heavy dirt and are disposable. The use of them alone is not recommended. In combo with OFR Mist, Kimwipes work well.

The best way to clean an optical surface is our PhotoClear cloths. They are made of the finest quality microfiber and clean well. The problem with this, and any other microfiber cloth, is that they trap dirt and get reused with out proper washing. This causes them to act like sandpaper. A Kimwipe on the other hand is disposable and doesn't cause this effect because it can't be reused.

If you are willing to wash your microfiber every 5 to 10 uses, then the PhotoClear is the finest available and significantly larger than those lesser very small cloths that you see for $5 on the counter at the camera store.

http://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=1111&IID=2059

You should be able to get these at most dealers but not any sponsored by this site.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Dear Ryan,

Thanks for the additional information.

Thanks Harry...I think I had posted it was a TYPO on my end...

but non the less...hopefully Anthony is getting the info he needs.

Cool.

Best,

H.