Purple fringing on snow, Greenland shots, G3 or G5 for White

[hippykrit]

I will be spending 11 months in Greenland as a Rotary exchange student and will leave in late July. I have been researching cameras on and off for the past six months and have decided on a G3 or G5.
My instinct is to go for the G5 as it has that extra megapixel and I am proficient with Photoshop for problems involving purple fringing.

Many people have commented that the purple fringing on the G5 is not that bad, but I am curious if its "effects will be increased" by the fact that many-most of my shots will be of or have snow, glaciers or big white skies.(Lots of bright white)

Any comments are welcome,
Thanks,
Jaxon

[kb244]

You may have to use a polarizer(maybe) , also when you shoot your subjects, be sure to have partial metering, and select the exposure based on the subject, rather than evalutative. Least this is from what I understand.

[John_T]

When it is bright you can use the built-in ND filter too. Better slightly underexposed than even slightly over. PF can occur under certain conditions in any optics when there are sharp contrasts at certain angles to the sun or light source. Shouldn't be a major problem, though you can't always avoid it.

The G5 is a little more prone to noise than the G3, so you should watch it on underexposures and low light. I have a G5 and a Pro 1. I would probably prefer the Pro 1 for where you are going. Less noise and rarely PF, more lens, though 8MP takes up more HD space, especially if you shoot RAW.

[hippykrit]

Thanks for the advice. It seems likely I will get the G5 if I can find one for a good price. I will also order polarizing filter. I plan to get the camera within a week or two, at which point I plan on hunkering down and reading through the instruction manual and taking a lot of poor pictures.

Yea for practice.

Thanks,
More comments welcome,
Jaxon

[hippykrit]

Thanks for the advice. It seems likely I will get the G5 if I can find one for a good price. I will also order polarizing filter. I plan to get the camera within a week or two, at which point I will hunker and and read through the instruction manual followed by plenty of poor pictures.

Yea for practice.

Thanks,
More comments welcome,
Jaxon

[kc0nxd]

I think the purple fringing will mostly happen on a contrast between light and dark. If you are outside and most of the picture is the same intensity you should be ok. If there is a flare of sunlight off of a glacier coming in which would be much higher intensity, then change your angles such that it is not as direct to the lens.

My G5 has been great. And i took some very bright photos of the sun shining off of the St. Louis Arch and they all turned out great. Just make sure the reflections are limited so that there is not a great contrast change.

If taking pics of friends for instance make sure any flares or high intensity glares are positioned directly behind the person so that they block the inbound light.

[Eyeris]

Sorry if I sound critical here – of a previous post. I’m not being critical at all; I just don’t want to be confused. I’m still learning, so when ever I read something that seems to conflict with something “I think” I already know, it’s best to resolve it as soon as possible.

In bright situations, it was suggested to use the built-in ND filter, to underexpose. The ND won’t cause underexposure will it? It’s my understanding that the ND filter allows you to use larger apertures or longer shutter speeds, depending on what you’re trying to accomplish, but the exposure remains the same (i.e. your picture isn’t any lighter or darker), right?

In addition, wouldn’t the ND filter make purple fringing worse, if it widens the aperture? Doesn't PF get better with smaller apertures?

Please let me know if I’m wrong.

Dave

[hippykrit]

I have know idea as I don't have the camera yet and still have Much to learn about digital photography. I hope someone can answer your question well, but in the meantime I would like to know what the ND filter is/does so I can follow this conversation better.
Thanks,
Jaxon

[Eyeris]

Sorry Jaxson. I didn't make it clear that I was directing these questions to everyone and anyone that may have the information, not just you.

The ND filter, in my mind, is used for any situation where you might need a larger apeture or longer shutter in situations where the available light doesn't allow it, like if you want a longer shutter for waterfall shots, panning a moving object, less depth of field...

[John_T]

ND stands for Neutral Density, sort of like sunglasses with no color, cuts the light down proportionately so that, as mentioned above, you can use wider f stops and slower shutter speeds. You can get underexposure with or without ND exactly the same whenever you set the wrong aperture/shutter settings. It is a physical filter in the G3, G5 and Pro1 that slides in the light path. You can actually hear and see it moving into place if you look in the lens while turning it on.

You don't use the ND filter to underexpose, rather to get settings back in range in case of very bright light, or help you take longer exposures, for example at night. Your image will not be lighter or darker because of the ND filter, rather because of the aperture/shutter selections you make.

Yes, PF becomes less with smaller apertures and should have completely disappeared by f5.6. The ND filter would not directly make PF worse or better. PF may become worse because of your aperture settings with or without ND, and the contrast and angle to the light source.

In short, ND doesn't do anything other that to reduce the light reaching the sensor by about two f stops. Neutral is the key word.