Shooting waterfalls

[reaper7534]

In a couple months I'm going over to western North Carolina to see Catawba Falls. Like to see what filters most people prefer, seems like camps are split on ND and CP. What are the benefits/ disadvantages of each ?

The two lenses I'll be using are 70-200 f/2.8 and 10-22 f/3.5-4.5

I believe both are 77mm threads, also recommendations on a tripod under or close to 200, head included.

Any links to filters appreciated. I'm not looking for absolutely top of the line, but don't want garbage either.

Thanks

 

[Trblmkr]

My Personal preference... ND for shooting waterfalls, I don't think a CP can slow down the water enough for that silky look. Of course it all depends on the situation of what your shooting too.
77mm Filters, I've been looking at B&W and that's all I'm looking at.

I have 2 Hoya's, one ND8 and ND400

Look at my Sigtag for my Tripod and Mount, I paid under $250 for the combo.

 

[480sparky]

NDs or a VND. Buy a good one. And a 'thin' version if you're going to use it on an ultra-wide lens.

 

[hirejn]

I don't use filters. I wait for overcast for even lighting and use low ISO, which enables slow shutter speeds. I may use a CPL for reducing reflections with the benefit of stopping down, but I don't use it specifically for stopping down. If the sun is on the water, it's blown out whether you have an ND or not. An ND doesn't reduce contrast range. When you adjust for the filter you still end up with the same exposure; it just means you've opened the shutter longer, which is presumably why you'd use an ND. Depending on the lighting and angle you could get good shots in full sun, but sometimes freezing the motion of water is as interesting as showing it.

 

[reaper7534]

I love the look of sparkys second photo, what was that taken with ?

 

[480sparky]

I love the look of sparkys second photo, what was that taken with ?

It's an 9-frame HDR, shutter speeds between 1/10 sec to 20 sec.

 

[WesternGuy]

ND for slowing down the waterfalls, CPL for removing the glare if there is any. Don't for get though that the CPL will also cost a stop or two as well as whatever the ND filter costs. I do not usually use a CPL with my ND when shooting waterfalls, but, if there is a lot of glare, then you may want to consider it. Depending on the time of day and lighting conditions, you will probably want at least a two stop ND filter. If you are shooting extended time images- 1/5 sec, etc, then you may want to use a remote shutter release and mirror lockup. Alternatively you can set the timer on your camera to trigger the shutter if you don't have a remote. As far as filters go, I use mostly the higher end Kenko, but B+W, Tiffen, Cokin, and Lee all make pretty good ones. If you stick with a known manufacturer, shop around a bit as price can vary.

Ron Bigelow has a series of 4 web-page articles on shooting water falls. The first one is here - Waterfalls -- Part I. Links to the following articles are at the bottom of each article.

For tripods, you get what you pay for. If you are looking for a relatively inexpensive unit, try looking at those made by Feisol - FEISOL USA / North America - Tripods Monopods Ball Heads - you might find a combination that will serve your purpose and last you for a while.

WesternGuy

 

[ducatiman1967]

I love using my variable ND for waterfalls or adding motion blur, I'd go with a VND filter.

 

[PropilotBW]

I don't use filters. I wait for overcast for even lighting and use low ISO, which enables slow shutter speeds. .

Every time I'm sightseeing, it's always perfect light.

 

[Derrel]

Keep in mind that removing ALL the glare from water often has unintended consequences. Same with foliage. At times, the diffuse highlights in a scene can provide critical depth and shape clues, as well as adding "presence" to smooth water, in things like creeks or plunge pools below waterfalls. When all of the glare is removed from the water, often times the visual presence of clear water is eliminated, and all the eye will see are the rocks that line the bottom of the stream bed. Just something to keep in mind. If in doubt, bracket shots, and do some with less-than-full polarizing. Getting rid of a little, or much of the glare can be a good thing, but eliminating huge percentages of glare or even diffuse highlights on foliage can lead to very weird, fake-looking shots sometimes. Eliminating huge percentages of the highlights on wet rocks can also lead to odd-looking shots.

 

[bc_steve]

I'd recommend the Hoya ND400 if you want to take long exposure shots of waterfalls in the daytime. It is not expensive. I got mine from ebay and it was around $40 (77mm). It isn't a filter I use very often, but I really like it when I do use it. There is a lot of opportunity to get creative with this filter.
A circular polarizer is a very useful filter for general use. It could be useful in a waterfall shot if you have a lot of glare coming off the water. Also it will darken the sky a little bit. Here is a useful site if you want to compare some circular polarizers: Polarizing filters test - Introduction - Lenstip.com. It is a few years old but it will give you an idea of how they stack up.

You definitely need a tripod if you plan on taking any long exposure shots. You should be able to find an aluminum tripod + head near that price range. Maybe a Manfrotto? People seem quite happy with them.

480sparky, those shots are great!

 

[480sparky]

Here's another view of the second one:

 

[Big Mike]

I don't use filters. I wait for overcast for even lighting and use low ISO, which enables slow shutter speeds. .

Every time I'm sightseeing, it's always perfect light.

That's the difference between a tourist and a photographer.

 

[PropilotBW]

I don't use filters. I wait for overcast for even lighting and use low ISO, which enables slow shutter speeds. .

Every time I'm sightseeing, it's always perfect light.

That's the difference between a tourist and a photographer.

yep!

 

[bunadski]

You may want to start with the CPL and try to shoot early in the morning if you can. At low ISO and aperture, you can already blur the water movement. However, as Derrel said, try also shooting with less-than-full polarizing since a bit of glare can sometimes strengthen your photo. Good thing about CPL is you can also use it not only for landscape shots, but also for your travel shots as well.

If budget permits and if you're into landscapes, I'd personally go for the square filter system such as Lee and Cokin for maximum flexibility. HTH