Jump to content

Hoya Red Intensifier for night shoots


glowinthedark
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys

 

I've read about a special Hoya filter, intended to be used for portrait or general landscape (especially in fall) photography: The "Hoya RA54 Red Enhancer (Intensifier)"

 

he original article that gave me that idea can be found here: http://www.lonelyspeck.com/hoya-intensifier-review-an-affordable-light-pollution-filter-for-astrophotography/

 

Now, I did some own comparison, to get an idea how well it works. First I compared the filter's properties with the emission line of a sodium light source; these nasty orange light you will anywhere in cities. Usually you can be miles away and still have a significant amount of orange glow in your picture.

The transmission properties of that particular filter seems promising. At 590nm wavelength (the emission maximum of a sodium lo pressure light source), we only have roughly 40% transmission while other wavelengths are only slightly affected. But what does it mean...? Well, that enables you to selectively cancel out a certain colour, in that case the annoying light of that sodium light source. Since it still has 40% transmission, you will not remove all of it, but for 30-60 € (depending of the diameter you need) it improves you pictures quite a lot.

 

Take a look at these pictures, showing a 250000-people city in central Europe (a heavy example of light pollution indeed):

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

 

 

All pictures were taken with a RX10, white balance set to cloudy (just to avoid the camera having any influence to the result), 8 seconds/ f2.8

 

I know, these are quite challenging conditions, with the city directly in front of you. If you use it in more typical scenarios, that filter should really do a good job removing the vast majority of orange-ish light form your night shoot. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the same 67mm filter on the Rokinon 12mm F2 for most of my star trail or milky way shots. The UAE, were I take most of the pics, are one of the most light polluted countries in the world and we have a huge number of sodium based light sources as all highways are fully lit up during the night. The filter is definitely worth every cent. I believe Norman from lonelyspeck also recently launched a special square light pollution filter. Tempted to try that one on the 70-200GM for deep sky pics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

The light pollution map is fascinating, and people seem so obsessed with light these days. I live on the edge of a major city, Leeds UK, in what could loosely be classed as a village but people have so much house area illumination, if they want to live in the equivalent of permanent daylight why don't they stay in inner cities? what is wrong with darkness?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Thanks for the very useful information. The 16-55 tempts me, I can live with the absence of stabilisation, what holds me is the price tag. As always, there is not such a thing like a free lunch in life. The Sony gives performance at a reasonable size but with no stabilisation and higher price tag, the Zeiss is compact, stabilised and reasonably priced but lower performed, while the Tamron provides performance at very good price and stabilisation at the expense of bulkiness. 😀 All in all, I think I will give a try to the Tamron, once I have taken in my hands. Here are two cutouts taken close to the center of the picture. The sharper one is the kit zoom, the other is the 18-105 mm, at approximately the same lenght around 40 mm at /f 8. The difference is impressive and more impressive for me is that all the lenses in the shop had the same behaviour on two different cameras. At this point looks like a whole batch and not just a lens.  

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

    • That's a pity and certainly doesn't match with my experience with the 18-105: mine is definately on par with the 16-50 kit lens (which on its own was as decent as I could expect from such a cheap lens). Sure, dont expect sharp corners especially wide open, but in the center my 18-105 left little to be desired across most of the zoom range. The 16-55 does beat it in every regard except zoom range though. The Tamron 17-70 trades blows with the 16-55 and might be the better choice in some cases. I went for the 16-55 because of the smaller size (I also found the 18-105 too bulky most of the time) and slightly wider FoV. My camera has a stabilized sensor so stabilized optics was no requirement for me. As you noted, I kept the 18-105 on my old A6000 for the occasional video project.
    • Thanks! The 18-105 mm /f4 was PERFECT lens for my needs but a HUGE disappointed. I bought it with the camera, then I brought it with me on a trip. To my disappointed, all pictures came out slightly blurred, like the lens was slightly out of focus. Stepping down was not solving the issue. The kit lens was definitely better, to my surprise. Thinking that I got a lemon, I went back to the shop where I bought It (luckily, I has bought both the camera and the lens in a brick and mortar store). We tested the lens on another camera and it was the same. Then we tested other copies of the same lens that the store had in stock and all showed the same lack if sharpness. All pictures slightly out of focus. In the end I returned the lens and used the money to buy other equipment. I must admit that it was a perfect lens for video but it is not what I use my camera for. Actually this was confirmed by the shop owner, most buyers of the 18-105 mm are interested in its video capabilities. I will have a look at the Tamron, the Sony 16-55 is almost double the price, at least here, so I will keep it out of the picture, at least for the time being. The Sigma also looks as an interesting option.  
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...