IR: EF-S or P&S?

<p>

<p>

<p dir="ltr">Hi,</p>

<p dir="ltr">I think about trying this and wonder which way to go. Should I get a converted P&S or a converted EF-S? My current gear is 7D, 10-22, 17-55 IS, 60/2.8, 100/2.8 IS, 135/2, 300/4 IS and 55-250 IS (the 24/3.5 II will likely join them in the near future). My IR knowledge is fairly limited and all I know is that if I get an EF-S it will have LV. I also read that some lenses are susceptible to hot spots and wonder if the 10-22 and 17-55 IS also suffer from this. If so, I might get an EF-S but if not, which P&S would fit? I want one with a minimum of 28mm FoV but 24mm FoV (are there wider PoV in P&S?) will be much better. Last, I know I do not want an IR filter because I mostly shoot handheld.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Budget: I do not have a definitive one but I know it won't make a significant percentage of my shooting so I don't want to spend too much.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Thoughts and ideas will be welcomed. TIA.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

</p>

<p>Hi Yakim,<br>

I started IR shooting a little over a year ago, and when I started I had similar questions... Convert a 20D or a P&S and to what wavelength... research here on photo.net, on flickr, and internet searches led me to:<br>

Convert a Canon powershot pro-1 I had collecting dust. Through research I found that the pro-1 EVF and swing out LCD screen allow for composition in the IR spectrum rather than with dSLR you do not see the IR effect until after the shot. I sent my pro-1 to Lezot camera to remove the IR filter and replace it with a 72R filter, Results here...<br>

I feel I am still in the early experimental stages with IR shooting, always being surprised by the outcome! Good Luck with your search</p>

<p>Happy Shooting</p>

 

<p>Of course, you can start off by just accepting very long exposures and shoot on an unmodified dSLR (see the somewhat dated, but still very useful, post by Gisle Hannemyr at <a href="http://dpanswers.com/content/irphoto.php">LINK</a>. I'd try this first and then see if it is worth the additional cost of getting a "hot mirror" (or whatever IR filter there is) removed or not.</p>

<p>In addition, some older digital cameras like some of the Sony 'bridge' cameras had very weak IR filtering.</p>

P&S way will be the easiest and most cost-effective. Once a hot mirror is removed from the sensor, then you can have live view through IR filters with any p&s. Given the cost differences between an SLR and p&s, try the p&s. Just look for more simple p&s cameras that do not have much of fancy tech - conversion and disassembly will be much quicker.

You can probably do the conversion of a simple p&s camera yourself - just give yourself an hour and make sure you document the disassembly :)

p&s IR conversions are the easiest things that can be done as a small DIY project.

Once you're comfortable with p&s IR and really want more, then get an SLR converted - by then you'll have a much more specific set of needs/wants defined.

<p>This site reports that the 10-22 does not have hot spot problems.<br>

<a href="http://www.jim-kramer.com/IR-Lenses.htm">http://www.jim-kramer.com/IR-Lenses.htm</a></p>

<p>FWIW, my take is that using a deep IR (830nm) filter and putting up with the lower sensitivity is worth it. The B and G filters in Bayer sensors block most IR in the 650 to 800 range. They still block over half the IR beyond 830 nm, but that leaves you enough information to do the Bayer demosaicing detail reconstruction magic. The 5D B and G channels are incredibly ugly just using an IR filter over the lens, but with an 830 nm filter on the sensor, they're quite reasonable. This probably differs between cameras, though. Here's a full-size image from an IR-converted 5D. Not perfect, but a lot better than I was worried it might be. (It's just a test image; boring as a photo and taken on a day with light cyan skies almost indistinguishable from the clouds.)<br>

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/127605666/original">http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/127605666/original</a></p>

<p> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Price wise, I think a converted P&S would be better for me. I'm not at all sure how much I'll do this so I first want to just dip my toes in. If I go that route, is that a certain P&S I should consider? Do the old Sony really have an advantage?<br>

 

<p dir="ltr">Another thing that bugs me is which IR conversion to prefer. I simply like them all..... BTW, I did spot a <a href="http://www.h-maccario.de/wordpress/?page_id=421">German firm </a>that has all in one (they remove the built-in filter completely and you use external filters) but total cost is something only die-hard enthusiasts will bear.<br />

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p>I had my 30D converted with the 830nm filter 18 months ago - but LV would make it a lot easier, and I'm not sure I made the right filter choice. Any underexposure, and I get the world's worst banding.</p>

<p>Yakim,<br>

find a p&s that is comfortable to use and allows easy manual controls. Try to avoid sensor-shift stabilization cameras if you decide that you need stabilization. Any regular ~150$ p&s would work.</p>

<p>

<p dir="ltr">Thank you. I think I will.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

 

<p></p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>