infrared filter

Shoei said:
My D80 required about 40second exposure at F8 iso100 to get an image. Plus the 18-70 AF-S lens isnt supposed to be very good for IR, causes hot-spots(?).

Will still have a play around with this, but it means lugging the tripod every where which is a pain at the moment and not just cos its awkward.

If this proves a waste of time that i think it will, time to start playing with other things. Need to get motivated again, my mojo got up and left the day the Neurologist said im looking at MS.

Do love the look of IR, its the surreal effect you get, to me the pics have a very calming look to them. Could do with some on the office wall, help me stay calm and stress free.
Click to expand...
if I was you I would invest in a 2nd hand D70/D50 as the infrared they produce are brilliant.

Also I used ISO400 on my canon to get some of the above shots.
 
Fstop11 said:
Its a bright day today. Go do some infrared shots at F8 ISO200-400 and note what the exposure times are.
If they are over 20 seconds then yes the camera isn't great for infrared.

an infrared only camera has its advantages but also disadvantages.
Click to expand...

OK so I managed to get some decent length exposures in today's light. Annoyingly its very windy too so trees just blur. Very noisy results though. This one was the best quality I managed over various iso values (200-1600) and exposure lengths (2.5-20 sec). I still had to increase the exposure a lot in lightroom however to get it bright enough to view (+3ev). Is this normal or should I be getting brighter exposures?

This photo is un edited apart from white balance. Should it be brighter given the exif?

IMG_5664.jpg


Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL
Image Date: 2009:05:11 11:51:53
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 35.0mm
CCD Width: NaNmm
Exposure Time: 20.000 s
Aperture: f/8.0
ISO equiv: 400
White Balance: Auto
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual
Click to expand...
 
Go find a field, looks like you're in a very dark area and the darkness of the buildings makes the relatively bright trees look darker.

Open field on a sunny day, chaaaaaaaarge!!

FStop, you say the D50 is good for IR too, can it be modded like you did your D70?
 
Helium_Junkie said:
Go find a field, looks like you're in a very dark area and the darkness of the buildings makes the relatively bright trees look darker.

Open field on a sunny day, chaaaaaaaarge!!

FStop, you say the D50 is good for IR too, can it be modded like you did your D70?
Click to expand...

Nikons pre D80 are very good for infrared. They used a much weaker low pass filter infront of the sensor. Anything released after the D80 has a much heavier IR block.

D50 and D70 = good :)

I have a modified Canon 350D and I used Canon 20/30/40 for tripod based IR work using a Hoya R72 58mm.
 
Fstop11 said:
Nikons pre D80 are very good for infrared. They used a much weaker low pass filter infront of the sensor. Anything released after the D80 has a much heavier IR block.

D50 and D70 = good :)

I have a modified Canon 350D and I used Canon 20/30/40 for tripod based IR work using a Hoya R72 58mm.
Click to expand...

How good is a modded 350D? Can you post any shots you took with it + exifs? What are the disadvantages of modding camera for IR? Thinking of doing it myself. Where did you mod yours/how much did it cost?
 
Fstop11 said:
if I was you I would invest in a 2nd hand D70/D50 as the infrared they produce are brilliant.

Also I used ISO400 on my canon to get some of the above shots.
Click to expand...

At least D70's arent going for silly money on fleabay. May be an option later in the year to pick up a 2nd body. See how things go.
 
I personally would prefer to get an old nikon for infrared because I prefer the couple of second exposures as it blurs the clouds wonderfully. modded cameras freeze the action all the time and I find the novety wears off quick. I shot a lot of infrared before modding my own camera and now I don't do as much.

The shots below are taken with the 350D modded

06.jpg


04.jpg


07.jpg


I bought the filter for about £100 and did the mod myself.
requires you to fully disemble the camera (not recomended as you may break it (requires very delicate soldering)
also you'll puta funk load of dush over the sensor its self.
 
Helium_Junkie said:
Always loved that tree behind the gate :)
I would want both options, but a couple hundred for a spare body is beyond me. Ah well!
Click to expand...

If I was using a nikon system I wouldn't of modified one of my bodies as it doesn't get enough use. You can easily get sick of doing infrared so its best left minimal. I would have invested in a D70s or something as I like the blur of trees and clouds.

Thanks, I love that tree behind the gate too. Its easily my best infrared photograph.
 
Fstop, what glass did you buy as in what wavelengths does it let in? Did you have to buy it from america? Is there anyone in the uk who does the conversion as a service? I don't feel confident doing it myself not to mention I don't have all the tools.
 
Last edited:
greedy123 said:
Fstop, what glass did you buy as in what wavelengths does it let in? Did you have to buy it from america? Is there anyone in the uk who does the conversion as a service? I don't feel confident doing it myself not to mention I don't have all the tools.
Click to expand...

Its just a 1.6x crop of the Hoya R72 as far as I am aware. I did have to import it from the US and I don't know of any credible Uk services.
 
Well, you can just stop down the lens and/or use an ND filter on the lens if you want to have slow shutter speeds again.
 
really struggling with the false colors on some test shots :( anyone got any other tuts for this as the one on the other page didnt help me much
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom