Going ahead with reviews we have finally
received ND filter. It’s not tested yet but I would try to show you my very
first lookup.
ND filter
As discussed in the previous post, it is an
alternative complement to sports cameras, different from the UV filter. Remembering UV one, it doesn't affect the images or logs at all, but I have noticed it's very useful in protection performance.
ND filter, instead, set some slight changes to video records. Protection performance is the same as UV, but introducing some improvements, such as jelly effect narrowing, for example.
As is known, jelly effect is the feeling of keeping the trembling in the video
recordings.
First lookup
Contrast inbetween is very evident in first view after checking these filters (ND and UV), due ND filter present a smoked plastic cover while UV it’s totally transparent.
ND filter (left) vs UV filter (right)
Manufacturing instead it’s almost the same. Both filters are almost twins due are both built in low cost plastic material. The
only difference it’s smoked covering. Therefore, both are same able to protect
our camera lens but, keeping in mind the way ND lens is smoked, I really
doubt about his usefulness. I guess image will darkened a little bit but no other result would be get.
About ND filters
I am not really an expert in photography so I
am trying to explain this as easy as possible.
Literally, ND filters correspond to Neutral Density filters according to their acronym. This kind of filters are usually set in reflex cameras to get impressive landscapes and moving scenes.
Real functionality it’s to limit the light who
reach the sensor set in camera. Al light spectrum will be affected same way, so that
is the reason of Neutral nomenclature. To flight video records purposes, two main capabilities could be highlighted:
In photography, in long time exposition photos, this
sensor will prevent burn aspect in images. ND would decrease the effect.
In high light locations, will prevent extra
exposition.
Clearly the second capability seems to be the
most useful to our needs. Commonly video camera will be getting up and down
fast due drone movement, swapping the camera which would focus from sun direct light
records to normal light video records. ND filter should help in these
situations.
Finally, ND filters are usually divided into
categories depending on the light filtering coefficient (25%, 50%, etc.)
Obviously, the one I have is bad enough to not have this capability.
Photo and video
test
Done very first test I was very sure this filter
will not work as expected. Few photos in dark night trying to minimize
streetlight brightness show me worst results than I thought. Photos are shown
very dark and is only appreciable a soft light that match with the streetlight.
Obviously, not that I was looking for.
No filter (left). ND filter (right)
Please, notice that I am using an action camera to
take photo and video, brand Eken W9. I have set it in 1080P / 30fps to take
videos and 12Mp to take photos. I don’t want to value if these setting match
with reality due the quality of the camera. I am quite sure imterpolation is
working for it.
Finally, after done all test scheduled,
checking several situations with fast light changes I was forced to change my
opinion. My global expectations were satisfied. This simple complement works
very well, despite his quality in manufacturing. It’s able to minimize hard brightness in fast
light changes. Looking to FPV situations, it’s obvious that it would be that
environment what will be present in most of flight days.
Getting to the point, below you could see by
yourself how this filter works. You could also see how his performance is
better in video than in photo, but useful in both cases.
Photo test:
No filter (left). ND filter (right)
As you can see, filtered image is shown a
little darkened and brightness is clearly minimized.
Video test:
No filter video
UV filter
ND filter
First two videos looks like so close each other.
Are taked without filter (first) and with UV filter (second).
On the other hand, last video shown (third)
show how this filter could work. Brightness disappear in large degree. Video is
improved so much.
To be honest, video performance look awesome.
To be honest, video performance look awesome.
I like
Low-cost lens protector (around 5$).
High protection against shocks and specks.
Could be set easy and will remain relatively
strong due to gummy ring.
Basic smoked process works great.
Minimize jelly effect (not tested yet).
I don’t like
Not high quality made off, but in line with the
price.
Fabricated based in UV filter, only adding
basic smoked process.
In bad light environment, bad results. Photos
quality decrease highly.
Not as easy to find as UV filter.
In summary
In summary
Better to value by yourselves. Check my test
results and take in consideration it’s a very cheap complement that could help you
very much.
In my own experience, I am very sure that would
be very benefit to my FPV camera. Add some improvements to UV filter benefits
with close price. Furthermore, I consider to take both filters to alternate
depends on the light conditions. In soft light conditions, I will take UV.
Otherwise, will choose ND.
Regards.
Comments
Post a Comment