DSLRUsers.com

... Obsolete ...

I actually have the same dilemma since I will hopefully be getting a UW zoom soon - I look forward to the responses!

This question comes up quite often.
Refer my post in this thread:
http://www.dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=31725&p=348737
THe links are still there.

... Obsolete ...

The pictures posted in that thread are not from ultra wides

Just what do you call an ultrawide
Some of the photos I linked were taken with a 10mm lens
They don't come much wider than that.

Maybe he assumed you were using a telephoto fisheye.

There seem to be a couple of things that thread shows:
1. you need to get your exposure right first and a polariser won't help with that
2. You need to know at least basic image optimisation eg with levels and curves
3. A circular polariser with wide angeles can produce differing results depending on the field of view of the lens and the angle to the sun
4. You have to know what you want and why
5. Particularly given there's no possibility of realistic depiction in photography, then even the more extreme effects may have some creative potential given vision and control.

You can pick up cheap polarisers on ebay for $20 or so. I think the obvious conclusion is to play around with one of those first, even if it vignettes. HDR is probably another alternative as well.

Personally I don't even own a circular polariser and my 16mm fisheye won't take one anyway. Mind you I haven't really got into landscapes in digital so far. I never used a polariser (circular or otherwise) on 6x17 with Velvia 100 - it would have been counterproductive for that.

Regards,
Murray

Mr Darcy wrote:Just what do you call an ultrawide
Some of the photos I linked were taken with a 10mm lens
They don't come much wider than that.

Greg, With all due respect, 10mm is so yesterday! In film days we thought 17mm was ultra wide (or maybe 14mm), in DSLR days we thought 12 then 10 was ultra wide, of course now Sigma has released the 4.5mm fish anything else is now viewed as 'normal'.

... Obsolete ...

I only saw one image in that post, but upon re-reading your comment, I note your reference to the links, and not images in that topic.
My mistake.

NO worries. I thought that may have happened.

No, I didn't click on any of those links... the file size turns me right off.
You could have images a fraction of those file sizes with little or no perceivable loss in quality, especially true if you are viewing them on a bog standard 6-bit LCD panel.
I'll try and remember to look when I'm at work.

I took those photos out the front door in a matter of minutes specifically in response to the question posed in that thread. I was pushed for time, so didn't bother to resize the photos, but posted them straight out of the camera. I didn't even remember to reset the image size on the camera. They were all taken Large/Fine, hence the huge file size.

Weeks later, I thought about resizing them, but thought the need had passed, and anyway, the large size allows you to see the detail of the effect. If you ask nicely ( ), I will resize the UW ones and post them here directly.

Here's the Siggy at 11 mm

I sortof like the pol effect, but it doesn't suit all shots on the UW

I posted a pic a little while back

http://www.dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=32933

hope this helps.

Cheers
Cameron

The effect can get quite pronounced at very wide angles during mid-day: