1cmb23 wrote:
Hi,
I have worked with infrared photography when using film, but can I do this with a digital camera?
I have several modified cameras for IR photography, and its really fun.
First one was an older Sony A55. This is not a mirrorless, and because IR focuses differently, the auto focus is always off by a bit forcing me to do manual focus.
The second one was a mirrorless Olympus EM5ii. Since it is mirrorless, it auto focuses perfectly. Guess which one gets used more!
I also elected to have the cameras be full spectrum. This means that I have to use an external IR filter. But it also means that I can use a special UV_IR cut filter and get back the normal camera operation.
I really like being able to pick 590nm or 650nm or 720nm or even 850nm depending upon what I'm in the mood for. The longer the wavelength, the less visible light gets through meaning that it can only be used for B&W.
Some people decide they only want to do B&W with the camera and have the camera modified with a 720nm or even 850nm filter. But a little secret. I like the B&W results I get with a 590nm or 650nm filter over what I get with the longer wavelength options. Reason is that more visible light gets captured, and when I turn it into B&W (usually with NIK's Silver Efex Pro - and I really like what I get with the preset WetRocks). With the longer wavelengths, it certainly is B&W, but I find that it is also harsher. The beauty of B&W comes when there is a richness of gray tonality, and with the longer wavelengths, some of this tonality is lost.
One more thing. Once a camera is modified, it is just as sensitive to IR light as it was to visible light. This means you can hand hold the camera without out those ridiculously long shutter times.
And about lenses. Some lenses are prone to hot spots which cause the center of the image to be brighter than the area around it. And it gets worse as you stop down farther and farther. And other lenses don't have this problem at all. There are web sites that advise on which lenses have this problem or not. And you can ask on this site for information on lenses you have on if they exhibit this problem or not. Perhaps some of the newer lens coatings contribute to this? Many older lenses don't seem to have this problem. One lens I find good to use on my Olympus EM5ii is the low cost 14-42mm lens. When compared to the more expensive 12-40mm f2.8 pro lens, I find that this more expensive lens has a hot spot issue, whereas the cheaper one mentioned here doesn't seem to have any issues at all.
I do tend to do most of my IR shooting at wider focal lengths. But there is also an aspect of IR that it can penetrate haze and smoke fairly well. When we have had wildfire problems here in California, I have shots that cut through the smoke with the IR camera that are opaque to a visible light camera.
I recommend using a mirrorless camera. If you don't have a mirrorless camera to use, look for a used one. I am perfectly happy with my EM5ii which came out in 2016 if I remember correctly. I don't need the latest, greatest features for IR. The EM5ii has IBIS and it has electronic shutter. These I care about. Images per second, and eye focus, and other stuff are not of interest to me for IR.
Let us know what you decide.