Just got my first IR filter...

Helium_Junkie · 21 Jan 2008 at 10:41

mcwildcard said:
Is there any specific settings I should be looking at changing to try and minimise the flare?

I had awful lens flare, adding a hood got rid.

mcwildcard · 21 Jan 2008 at 10:56

Helium_Junkie said:
I had awful lens flare, adding a hood got rid.

Ah, now you mention it, I stuck the sunlight hood on halfway through (to try and keep the light rain off the filter), and none of the subsequent photos had noticable flare on them. Makes the removal of the filter for focusing much more of a pain though!
On the subject of white balance, am I better off shooting in RAW and then just sorting that out in PP?
I can set a custom white balance with the camera, but it doesn't seem to work too well with IR.

Edit: Nevermind, just seen the other thread about the same thing.

Helium_Junkie · 21 Jan 2008 at 11:06

Depends what PP spftware you have, but in my case I got better results using camera WB than Lightroom.
Also, I can focus with the IR filter on with no issues, are you sure you cant?

mcwildcard · 21 Jan 2008 at 11:15

Helium_Junkie said:
Depends what PP spftware you have, but in my case I got better results using camera WB than Lightroom.
Also, I can focus with the IR filter on with no issues, are you sure you cant?

I can, but it's really hard to see on the display due to the filter, so I'm almost doing it blind.
The autofocus seemed to just about manage, but because of the lack of a tripod it was hard to tell on the pics if it was doing a good job or not, thanks to camera shake and/or underexposure.
All roads lead to a tripod!

GeX · 21 Jan 2008 at 11:35

it sounds like the s9600 isn't very sensitive to IR, i thought it had the same sensor as my F31fd, but i've just checked and dpreview and it seems thats the 6500.

I just tried holding the IR filter in front of the camera to see what it could see;
This is with no filter (just showing the weather is crap and cloudy)

and this is with the filter in front of the lens

it found a face.. bless.

(and i'm not sure why i shot it in ISO1600)

Helium_Junkie · 21 Jan 2008 at 12:21

Because its dark, your tripod was already being used and flash could have made the screen hard to see?

GeX · 21 Jan 2008 at 12:24

haha, it's more down to taking very quick photos and only bothering to set a rough aperture - i don't even know why i was using iso1600 in the past!

greengiant · 21 Jan 2008 at 16:35

GeX said:
i've not used an IR filter on anything other than my D50. but i've been focusing with the filter off, then switching the lens back to AF (to lock the drive so it doesnt move when i attach the filter) and then checking what the camera reackons for exposure time, switching to manual and then adding a bit to what it suggested.

on my last thread, exposure times varied from 4 to 30 seconds.

you should see better results in sunlight than you would at night in your room.

You don't refocus with the filter on?

greengiant · 21 Jan 2008 at 16:36

startrek2 said:
some outstanding shots here

http://www.pbase.com/zylen/infrared not intended for any to buy from her just she catches what IR is about i think

Pretty good images on that site!

GeX · 21 Jan 2008 at 17:00

greengiant said:
You don't refocus with the filter on?

normally, no. i've composed the shot with the filter off, so why not focus it too?

the AF works through the filter though.

Helium_Junkie · 21 Jan 2008 at 17:33

GeX said:
i don't even know why i was using iso1600 in the past!

Was the camera last used in an extremely dark run-down terrifying abandoned mansion?

GeX · 21 Jan 2008 at 18:07

hehe, i've not had time for many trips like that yet - the last one was half way up a rollercoaster

greengiant · 21 Jan 2008 at 18:26

GeX said:
normally, no. i've composed the shot with the filter off, so why not focus it too?

the AF works through the filter though.

Well I find my K100D refocuses a little after I apply the IR filter to the lens. I find if I don't refocus, the resulting image is a little soft.

greengiant · 21 Jan 2008 at 18:32

GeX said:
normally, no. i've composed the shot with the filter off, so why not focus it too?

the AF works through the filter though.

Well I find my K100D refocuses a little after I apply the IR filter to the lens. I find if I don't refocus, the resulting image is a little soft.

GeX · 21 Jan 2008 at 18:52

is that down to the focus being altered as you screw the filter on? suppose it makes sense it'd the extra glass would change the focus, but like i say - with mine i've not done that, and if you look at my last IR thread they came out pretty sharp.

scoop · 22 Jan 2008 at 13:14

As IR is a different wavelength to visible light, it is refracted, and therefore focussed, slightly differently to the visible spectrum. Focussing with the filter off, then adding the filter will slightly change the focus point given the differing refractivity. Older manual focus lenses often tended to have a small red adjustment mark which allowed simple, reliable adjustment of the focus for those using IR film, to account for this.

Most times, focussing then attaching the filter makes little difference but it can account for the soft focus sometimes observed. I tend to compose first, then focus through the filter itself. On both an A80 P+S and a 30D this works much better for me and focus is generally found pretty quickly.