Infrared Conversion - looking for info...
May 4, 2019 13:35:21 #
sueyeisert wrote:
There are 2 places i’ve Used lifepixel.com and Kolarivision.com. A lot of people I know are using Kolarivision. Before doing anything read their websites. There can be problems with white balance.
Kolarivision converted a Canon SL1 for me. Don't use it much,but works well.
May 4, 2019 13:52:54 #
rmorrison1116 wrote:
I have a Canon 6D I'd like to have converted to infrared. Does anyone have any reliable info on a good place to have it done and how much it will cost?
I've had several cameras modded by LifePixel (Canon 7D II and 60D, Sony A7S, A7R and RX10 III). They do a great job!
bwa
May 4, 2019 14:50:00 #
I have had 2 cameras converted by LifePixel and have been very pleased. No problems or concerns.
May 4, 2019 20:56:18 #
If you do a full spectrum conversion, as has been suggested, you can take advantage of various filters in the IR spectrum, as well as using a "hot mirror" filter to take regular pictures. But, to frame in IR you will have to use live view or frame with the filter off and then put it on. Your viewfinder will be completely dark with filters at 790nm and above. This is where mirrorless cameras come in handy, you can see the actual effect in the viewfinder.
May 4, 2019 21:31:47 #
Bo0mer wrote:
If you do a full spectrum conversion, as has been suggested, you can take advantage of various filters in the IR spectrum, as well as using a "hot mirror" filter to take regular pictures. But, to frame in IR you will have to use live view or frame with the filter off and then put it on. Your viewfinder will be completely dark with filters at 790nm and above. This is where mirrorless cameras come in handy, you can see the actual effect in the viewfinder.
Since I didn't have a mirrorless camera to convert, I went with an internal filter. The very thing I didn't like with IR film is having to use a tripod and compose and focus with the filter off. With the internal filter I get shutter speeds I can hand hold at 400 ISO. I knew I wanted to do mostly color so I chose the Lifepixel Enhance Color filter which is 665. I can also do black and white with it, with a little contrast boost. But having shot IR film and printed it in a darkroom, I just can't get the same quality with B&W digital IR. But with the digital capability to control and manipulate color, I can do things I never could do with color IR film.
May 4, 2019 21:45:38 #
Phil Martin wrote:
Isaac Szabo converted three cameras for me. He's good, and he's reasonable.
...agree. Isaac did clean and cost efficient work for me, too.
May 5, 2019 13:16:44 #
dpullum wrote:
whoever... others can answer. I would, however, suggest that the conversion be a "full spectra" allowing you to add the nm filters to fit your mood or situation. Allowing some visible light to be in your photo adds a whole new mood vs the old standby of B&W of 720nm or greater.
Thank you for your response. I've been reading and absorbing as much info as I can and the full Spectra approach does appear to have greater flexibility and merit then a specific wave length.
May 5, 2019 13:33:53 #
sueyeisert
Loc: New Jersey
rmorrison1116 wrote:
Thank you for your response. I've been reading and absorbing as much info as I can and the full Spectra approach does appear to have greater flexibility and merit then a specific wave length.
The problem with full spectrum is that you need a filter for each mn ie 590nm, 720nm etc then if you use different lenses the filter sizes can be different so you could need 3 different 720nm filters. If you think you’ll use adapters then you have another set of problems. The adapter can get stuck on the filter then there is the problem of the lens shade not fitting the lens. All of these things I’ve experienced.
May 5, 2019 13:39:54 #
sueyeisert wrote:
The problem with full spectrum is that you need a filter for each mn ie 590nm, 720nm etc then if you use different lenses the filter sizes can be different so you could need 3 different 720nm filters. If you think you’ll use adapters then you have another set of problems. The adapter can get stuck on the filter then there is the problem of the lens shade not fitting the lens. All of these things I’ve experienced.
I really have fun with my conversions. That said, I take 'em out infrequently and relearn some stuff as a result. All part of the fun. But, really, unless you're "all in" on infrared, maybe keeping it simple is the best approach...my results are pretty dang cool, and I've sold a couple. YMMV, but my ultimate suggestion is to learn *one* and go from there. (I started at 720nm and later got a 590 conversion...love both).
May 5, 2019 14:43:14 #
sueyeisert wrote:
The problem with full spectrum is that you need a filter for each mn ie 590nm, 720nm etc then if you use different lenses the filter sizes can be different so you could need 3 different 720nm filters. If you think you’ll use adapters then you have another set of problems. The adapter can get stuck on the filter then there is the problem of the lens shade not fitting the lens. All of these things I’ve experienced.
I've read the full spectrum conversion when tuned to a 50mm lens should cover 18-300mm, or did I interpret that wrong. Anyway, my utility lens is a Canon 28-300L so I'll start with a set of 77mm filters. Also, many of my Canon lenses, zoom and prime are 77mm. I do have filter adapters that I've had success with in the past.
May 5, 2019 15:09:29 #
DeanS wrote:
Kolarivision converted a Canon SL1 for me. Don't use it much,but works well.
I'm leaning towards Kolari Vision. Although both companies look very professional, Kolari Vision is located under two hours from my home in PA.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.