photodoc16

Hogs and Hogettes,
I have been tempted to give a go at IR photos. My first thought would be to try an add on filter (? Hoya R72) and have seen some wonderful examples of filter produced images. I have also read about the massive frustration of some in trying to maintain a color image because of the difficulty in manipulating the colors to form a pleasing picture. Any general advice for this newbie IR enthusiast?
Thanks,
Photodoc16

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Took an old DSLR and shipped it to Life Pixel. They also sell converted cameras.

https://www.lifepixel.com/?gclid=CjwKCAjwwJrbBRAoEiwAGA1B_Ys82xBBQRTOrjX-U9y08ypTiqlJv6p4ERECxY6ze4SBC7riy5zr7hoCiOEQAvD_BwE

My 2 cents.

doxphoto Loc: Allentown, PA

I do a lot of BW IR; never cared much for the weird colors.
A Hoya 72 works very well, but I have a LifePixel converted Fuji XPro 1 which is much easier and obviates need for multiple filters for various lenses.

CO

I used to use the Hoya R72 IR filter when I shot Kodak HIE b&w infrared film. It was a great match for that film. I haven't done digital infrared yet.

Infrared focuses a little differently. The lenses I used had the infrared mark on them. You may have to manually focus your lens and compensate a little to achieve the best focus.

Manual focus lens IR focusing mark

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

I tried the filter first but focusing was a problem. Adapted my D3s to IR by Lifepixel

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

With the conversion, there is no need to guess the IR offset.

I have two modified camera with both modified for full spectrum, which means that I have to use filters on the lenses:

1) An older Sony A55. I need to manually focus, which is not difficult to do, since the SLT method of focusing is calibrated for visible light.

2) An Olympus O-EM5ii. Since it focuses at the sensor, there is no issue with auto focusing. No matter what lens I use, focus is always correct.

I have found that I prefer the B&W IR over the false color IR. But I have experimented with the false color too.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

I used to shoot a lot of IR B&W film. I didn't like the color IR film because the colors were too weird, especially the red skies. After I had gone digital, I saw some examples of digital IR in color and B&W. The B&W ones were very similar to the look of IR B&W film, but some of the digital color IR interested me because some of them had blue skies, but the other colors were somewhat surrealistic. I got an old Nikon DSLR converted at Lifepixel with the enhanced color filter so I could try that out. I found out the blue skies came from swapping the red and blue channels, and from there and lots of PP, I got some shots I liked:

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Check in with UHH user blacks2. His newest postings:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-546359-1.html

-

photodoc16

Thank you all for your input. I am a bit confused about the fact that with a "full spectrum" conversion, a lens filter was still necessary. Would JimH123 help me out on this? Also, would you tell me if you can use LIVE VIEW to focus if needed and what the SLT method of focusing is all about?

Thanks,
Photodoc16

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

With a full spectrum conversion, the camera can capture the entire spectrum from a portion of UV all the way to near IR. Without a filter, the image will have all of this spectrum in the picture. A filter is used to limit the amount of spectrum it responds to. When the camera is modified, the choice is to add the filter to the camera, meaning that it covers the sensor, or to leave it out so that the user has to supply a filter on the lens. If the choice is to do it in camera, you have to specify what filter to add, and from then on, this is all you are able to do. If the filter is not inserted into the camera, then you add it as a filter on the lens, but now you can pick whatever filter you wish to use such as 590nm, or 630nm, or 720nm, or whatever. Thus you get a chance to try anything you want. And filters are reasonably cheap if purchased on eBay. I have purchased them in several sizes, but you can buy them in a larger size and use step down rings so that they can be used for different sized lenses.

As for live view, definitely you want to use live view as using it with an OVF won't help at all. In the case of my Sony A55, it is always live view since there is a fixed semitransparent mirror placed into the light path with most of the image directed to the sensor and some of it reflected upward to another sensor used for focusing and live view. The Olympus EM5ii is a mirrorless and there is no diverting of the light so it is also permanent live view.

Hope this helps.

jcboy3

If you use an IR filter with normal camera, you have conflicting filters and need long exposures. If you do a “full spectrum” conversion, you need a filter for IR or visible (because you are just pulling the IR filter off the sensor). If you do an IR conversion then the camera takes IR shots like it used to take visible spectrum shots.

You can easily experiment with IR by converting a P&S camera to IR. I did this with a Panasonic TZ5 several years ago. It was simple to open the camera and pull thi IR filter. A custom white balance on foliage and the pictures are suite nice.

If you like it, then I suggest a converted camera. I converted a Mirrorless, and it’s small size makes it convenient to bring along when i travel. I used Life Pixel, butcthere are lots of companies that do it.

CO

I haven't done IR with digital but when I did IR with film, I would initially leave the IR filter off the camera. I would focus using the red IR mark on the lens and set the exposure according to the data Kodak included in the box of film. I would then attach the filter and take the shot. It's too dark to manually focus with the filter on. I wonder if some AF systems will not be able to acquire focus because the light is too dim.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

That's one of the big advantages of an IR conversion with an internal filter. You don't have to try to view and focus through a dark filter. And the exposure is much less than using a camera filter.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

That's true. In fact, I see on my LCD screen just as bright as I do when shooting non-IR. It is so easy to focus. And my mirrorless provides perfect autofocus too. My Sony A55 which is a SLT camera does autofocus really fast, but the focus is consistently off a tiny amount due to the camera not being calibrated for IR. Actually, the IR conversion companies will calibrate the camera to one lens in the process of doing the conversion. But I use many lenses, and manual focus is no big deal.

One more point. Some lenses can produce a hot spot in the center of the image. Especially at higher f-stop values. I have one cheapee kit lens that exhibits this behavior. My other lenses don't seem to have this issue at all. The solution is to just not use this lens for IR.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

LifePixel does nice conversions. Look at their site, read what they have to say, and then call or email and get more details. Some cameras convert better than others. They offer a choice of filters, so decide which one would be best for you.

https://www.lifepixel.com/