Why did this happen with M plus Noctilux combination

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While in Kashmir I wanted to try a long exposure with my new M so I set it up on a tripod and screwed on my 10 stop ND filter and on 90% of the shots I got this horrible white like haze over some of the picture, so my question is why?

is it because of;

1/. the camera

2/. the lens

3/. a bit of both

4/. My photography skills

 

The Exf info shows 25 sec f4 but I know for a fact it was at f16. Please note I did get one picture that was usable and that shows f4 and 12 sec.

Is there a way to correct this in Photoshop?

Any help would be much appreciated

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!

[UliWer]

As you used a ND-Filter, my first guess would be that it caused the trouble. Did you try to compare the results with and without filter?

 

Looking at the scenery of your photo I might try a second guess: perhaps moisture of the surroundings and/or big temperature differences led to condensation in the space between the front lens and the filter, so you got fog infront of your lenses. To avoid condensation under those circumstances one should unscrew the filter and let dry filter and lens completely before screwing it on again.

[wattsy]

If the typ 240 is anything like the M9/MM you need to watch for light leaks through the mount when making long exposures. Your haziness doesn't look like that kind of light leakage but may nonetheless have a similar cause.

[algrove]

I'd try to rework it in LR before messing with PS. Try using the graduated filter to in effect change the exposure/contrast etc on the parts of the image that show the haze. Remember at f16 with an ND filter you are tricking the camera into thinking you are using another f stop. Maybe just a UV/haze filter would be sufficient here especially if you are using f 16 (which to me is out of the ideal f stop range for that lens) and just go for a higher speed if necessary.

 

Maybe you should have used f32>just joking. Seriously, with the Noci I try to keep max f stop at 5.6.

[Guest borge]

The visual haze / fog seems to follow the water. I bet it's the temperature differences (looks like a cold place?) between the water and the air which in a long exposure will make the haze visible (even if you couldn't see it yourself).

 

This is fairly common here in Norway where we have cold winters, frozen lakes, and all that stuff, and suddenly it becomes warm, or cold, and when that happens this is what you get. A long exposure will amplify the effect a lot.

 

I would have shot this with 2-5 sec exposure time at max. The amount of visible motion would have been the same. There's no need to maximize the exposure time just for the sake of doing it.

[otto.f]

Are you sure there was no moisture on the ND filter when it came out of your pocket, from your warm hands and onto a cold Noctilux and then exposed to the cold air?

In CaptureOne there is a tool Clarity and LR has something similar in the bottom part of the Exposure tool

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There is a way to correct this but you need to fight your way three quarters the Dan Margulis’

The Canyon Conudrum and other Adventures to understand it….

[jip]

Apart from the problem, nice location for a landscape!

[dugby]

Maybe it was the sherpa's huffn n puffn after lugging the Noctilux up the wee hills.....

[Paul J]

Hi Neil,

 

Did any shots like this happen without the water in the shot? It looks like physical haze or mist to me especially in that is over the areas of water disturbances (waterfall bits) the most. The kind that is probably very fine and hard to see with the eye but shows up in a long exposure that is backlit. It could be combined with some lens flare perhaps.

 

Long exposures like these often have surprises which is part of the fun.

 

I have to say I actually sort of like it, it's a nice shot and it looks natural and a a bit like the clouds above.

 

If you do want to correct it selectively brush in the area and replace the blacks. You can do this in lightroom or photoshop. Do it low opacity so it gradually builds up.

[Paul J]

Looking again, judging by the lighting on the rocks, it's backlit over water (easy to forget as you can't don't see the light source because the water is blurred) and the fact you have a filter on and such a long exposure my bet is it's mostly lens flare reacting with the environmental elements. I can't imagine that stream is flowing fast enough to kick so much of a water disturbance. Maybe it's a bit of both. I don't think the Noctilux hood is big to begin with and given the lens element is further out in front it's easy to happen. As soon as you introduce another element of glass inform of the lens these kind of things happen.

 

If you're on a tripod, keep an A4 sized piece of black card in your camera bag to shield the lens. You can actually buy a clip that will hold it on your tripod, it's called a french flag. When ever I am backlit I check my lens by waving your hand over the lens.

[brill64]

The hazeing effect is not evenly spread right across the image so I'd also hazard a guess that this is only atmospherics - water moisture - enhanced & picked up visually by the camera during the long exposure. This happens in the early morning as the sun comes up, heating the air & creating moisture and late afternoon as cold air comes down. I'd rule out condensation somewhere on your equipment, again because it's not evenly spread & would say that both camera and lens were both sound. Beautiful location!

[otto.f]

at 32 sec it occurs, at 12 sec it occurs not...

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Guys,

Thanks for the feedback and thoughts of what was going on. I have been raking my brain about this and I now think it was like most of you have already said "already there"

I am quite pernickety when it comes to making sure that the lens/filters are clean and I remember checking both of these as I was very close to the water and wanted to make sure that there was no splashes on the lens.

I have added another before and after picture from the same series and location and you can see that with just using Nik SEP and CEP presets the haze is just about gone, So again my gut feeling is that the long exposure captured what at the time I could not see.

Thanks again…………another mystery solved.

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!

[pico]

My guess is that it is flare from the light source, predominantly blue.

 

See this - it isolates the fog in a rather crude, forensic way.

 

http://www.digoliardi.net/tmp.jpg

[algrove]

I prefer the B&W. Looks like you could use a Monochrom too Neil.

[Keith (M)]

Superb b&w shot! Now, what was the problem...

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

I prefer the B&W. Looks like you could use a Monochrom too Neil.

Algrove I am thinking of getting one after Christmas, just still trying to convince myself that I need one.

[kdriceman]

Probably the flange light leak that is discussed in this thread. It happens on the M9 and the MM on long exposures under lighted conditions (I.e. When using a 10 stop ND filter). Some have confirmed the issue exists with the M240 also.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2508994-post.html

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[algrove]

Algrove I am thinking of getting one after Christmas, just still trying to convince myself that I need one.

 

You will not be disappointed. Just in one camera goes out you can switch your M lenses to another Leica (unless you plan on getting an a7r).