Jump to content

Camera for infrared photography


Recommended Posts

Hello Everyone,

 

I'm interested in trying infrared photography. I've actually thought of converting a camera before, but never did it. Can I just ask for an opinion? I have a very old Nikon D50 that I could send in to be converted for $275. The website Kolari Vision has an already converted point and shoot Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS35 for $280. I know the D50 is so old that I thought maybe the technology of the point and shoot might produce better images, but I don't know much about point and shoot cameras. I know that what I'd lose is a lot of control, but I just wanted to hear others' opinions on the quality difference. I considered getting a D3300 that is already converted, but its twice the price and I don't know if I'm truly going to stay interested in infrared photography. Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything you buy for toes dipping purposes, that will not hold up to your demands later, is wasted money. If you aren't sure what you'll like in the long run try to figure out what might reduce your losses when you resell it.

The D50 seems like the oldest entry level camera available and going for 75 Euro/$. It is unlikely you'll recover much of the almost 4x higher conversion cost. Somebody shooting DX would be most likely content getting a 3000 series body for their bit of infrared. I guess whoever buys your D50 next year will probably upgrade quickly to something in the 10MP+x ballpark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caroline, you don't have to get the camera converted to do infrared. Early DSLR's like the D50 are more sensitive to it than later ones, which have stronger internal filtering. Just get hold of an infrared filter to fit your lens. You can't see anything through this filter, so you have to compose and focus before fitting it, then shift the focus to the infrared mark on the lens. A tripod is essential as the shutter speed is going to be measured in seconds, so the technique is mostly restricted to landscape shots. I use manual exposure and judge it from the histogram, as auto exposure doesn't work at all well with infrared.Sadd1000.thumb.jpg.06e4b0217fac5b97c69a9aa7b5092b4b.jpg

 

It is a slow process of course. Here's one I did with my old D1X with an IR720 fitted to a 20mm manual focus lens.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with John. i would search the internet for information on any filter built into your camera that might prevent using an IR filter in the lens. If it is possible, I would use the 720 John recommends. About $70 for a 77mm. Here's a shot from a d700 so equipped. 1926664045_infraredbkyd.thumb.jpg.e769369455b25d37cf03e9680bc0c19c.jpg
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, there is the 'old school' way to do this! Rollei still makes an ISO 400 infrared film in 120 MF size--and Ilford ones in 35mm & 120 that are sensitive in the red to about 740nm. With an added deep red #29 filter you have spectacular shots!

 "I See Things..."

The FotoFora Community Experience [Link]

A new community for creative photographers.  Come join us!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, there is the 'old school' way to do this! Rollei still makes an ISO 400 infrared film in 120 MF size--and Ilford ones in 35mm & 120 that are sensitive in the red to about 740nm. With an added deep red #29 filter you have spectacular shots!

 

The modern films don't have the sensitivity of the old HIE.

 

I've experimented some with the Rollei in 35mm. With a deep red filter(#25 or #29) it more or less looks like a standard panachromatic film shot through those same filters at that range.

 

You really need a full blown IR filter, and don't cheap out with an Ebay Special. Get the Hoya R72 or B+W equivalent-they're not cheap, but will serve you well whether using film or digital. It was kind of painful for me, as in 12 years of fairly serious photography I don't think I've ever bought a new filter-lately I've been picking at the local camera shop that has a card catalog with thousands of filters in it.

 

In any case, I have metered the Rollei film at ASA 6 without the filter in a Nikon F3. Depending on where/what I'm doing I will sometimes remove the filter, compose, focus, meter, put the filter back on, move to the IR index mark, and shoot. As I get to know a scene, I'll often skip meter, will zone focus, and just eyeball the composition. In bright sun, I can generally shoot at 1/125 at anywhere from f/1.8 to f/2.8 or so. Bright sun is really where you want to shoot IR anyway, whether film or digitial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . . Early DSLR's like the D50 are more sensitive to it [iR] than later ones. . .You can't see anything through this filter, so you have to compose and focus before fitting it, then shift the focus to the infrared mark on the lens.

 

Yes.

 

That was the main reason why I asked caroline exactly what lenses that she had to use on her D50.

 

I believe that not all lenses that can fit to a D50 will have the IR refocus markings on them.

 

WW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do need to look at the lenses to see if they have a focus mark. I have a 28 mm, 50mm, 28-80, and 70-300 that I bought a long time ago with my F100 camera. Those probably have the mark. I have a D750 that came with a 24-120 lens. I had thought of converting the D50 because I don't use it anymore, but if I'm just using a filter I'll use the D750 and either my 28mm lens or the 50mm lens. I'll definitely get the Hoya filter. I didn't even know they still made infrared film. My brain doesn't go to film as an option automatically anymore- that's sad. I think they discontented the one I tried years ago. In any case I'll start with the filter to play with it and maybe I will order some film and break out the film camera later.

 

Thanks for all your suggestions everyone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . . I have a 28 mm, 50mm, 28-80, and 70-300 . . . 24-120 lens. I had thought of converting the D50 because I don't use it anymore, but if I'm just using a filter I'll use the D750 and either my 28mm lens or the 50mm lens. . . I'll definitely get the Hoya filter.

 

Thanks for answering my questions. There were secondary reasons for my asking.

 

You'd probably be best to stick to using your Prime Lenses in any case, whatever camera you use. There are lens optics / lens design reasons why Prime Lenses generally are less likely to exhibit IR Hot Spots.

 

Also note that you might attain better results using the D50 rather than the D750: this is because as already mentioned by John Seaman: "Early DSLR's like the D50 are more sensitive to it [iR] than later ones, which have stronger internal filtering." I am not familiar enough with those two Nikon cameras to make a definitive statement, but it doesn't matter, you can try both.

 

I was searching for this thread earlier [LINK] - just found it - maybe it will be of use for an initial exposure guide and other information.

 

These might assist as a guideline too, made with a Fuji x100s and an Hoya R72 Filter:

 

18392680-orig.jpg

 

18392681-orig.jpg

 

I still have IR Film in the deep DEEP freezer - haven't used that medium for several years.

 

WW

Images © AJ Group Pty Ltd Australia 1996~2017 WMW 1965~1996

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sort of pleading ignorance and also talking out my rear, but you'll want to double check on using your F-100 with IR film. Some newer cameras use IR for indexing and other purposes, and can fog or otherwise mess up IR films. I'm not sure if that's the case with the F-100 or not.

 

I've been doing all of my IR photography with an F3, but there's nothing particularly special about that camera. IF the F100 does have the IR problem, I might suggest picking up an F4 for ~$150. With some limitations, it will work with your newer lenses. It won't activate VR, and G lenses will only work in "P" and "S."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

You can get IR filters for low prices, brand new and mailed from China. Maybe not as good, but not so bad if you just want to play around.

 

You want to find the camera model with the worst IR cut filter, which in DSLRs is the earlier models.

 

I think some point and shoot also have poor filters, but I don't know which ones.

 

I have some 5R flashbulbs, waiting until I find a good use for them.

-- glen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

As others have suggested, IR filters would work, but you'll need a tripod, long exposures and IR focusing. If you just want to try it out, then that may be the least expensive option (other than film). But if you do get into IR, I would suggest having a body converted to full-time IR by Kolari, Lifepixel or others. If you do get a body converted, Kolari recommends a mirrorless body rather than a DSLR. A converted body will allow you to focus and expose normally, although with false color IR, you'd have to set white balance, so make sure the body you choose allows you to change WB.

 

I shoot IR with a Kolari-converted Sony A7R. It is converted to full spectrum, so I use IR filters (primarily 590nm and 850nm) to get the IR effect I want, or a color-correcting hot mirror filter to shoot "normal" images. Of course, you can choose other conversions, e.g., dedicated to 590nm or 665nm or 850nm, etc... Here are some examples with the 850nm filter.

 

http://www.leonin.net/img/s2/v73/p332593527-4.jpg

 

http://www.leonin.net/img/s11/v29/p29947248-4.jpg

 

http://www.leonin.net/img/s12/v184/p506223807-4.jpg

 

From the same body, here are a couple of "regular" photos with a color-correcting filter:

 

http://www.leonin.net/img/s11/v36/p269863107-4.jpg

 

http://www.leonin.net/img/s7/v153/p371953728-4.jpg

Edited by photo_galleries
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can get IR filters for low prices, brand new and mailed from China. Maybe not as good, but not so bad if you just want to play around.

 

I bought and played with a couple of Ebay cheapies. Most did reliably cut-off at their specified value(I only bought 720nm filters) and were more or less visually opaque, but showed pronounced transmittance up past 400nm or so. This might not be a big deal in digital, but it kind of kills IR film.

 

I finally bit the bullet and bought a Hoya R72. I think it was around $70 from B&H. I bought the 72mm version, although now that I'm into a system that mostly uses 77mm filters(Mamiya RB67) I wish I'd gone ahead with a 77 or 82. As long as you're not using wide angles, cheap step-up rings will serve you fine and IMO are a better choice that buying an expensive filter in every size(for a lot of SLR users that's going to be 52, 55, 58, 67, and 72).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, I don't know about above (in energy) 400nm. I could also put on a UV filter if I worried about that.

 

The eye has some sensitivity past 720nm, so in sunlight you can see just a little bit through one.

-- glen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Moderator note: the contents of this post has been deleted.

 

User "lilichin" - Please do not double post your questions in different forums, doing so contravenes the User Guidelines and Terms of Use - and there are good reasons for this rule.

 

[Please see this LINK to the other posting]

 

In any case, your question will probably harness more responses as a NEW thread in "Film and Processing" Forum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I would not convert an old camera. For example, my converted Panasonic G1 is "mushy" a lot, and the G5, which I bought used, just for converting, produces a lot more crispness. You want to be very careful who you have do it but that price you list sounds like quite a bit more than we've paid. I have converted 3 myself and received 2 as gifts. My lastest, Fuji 100, converted really well. It is exciting to use. I'm going back to some places like Kauai and re-photographing some of the palm groves because the latest camera is so much better than earlier ones. I started out, by the way, shooting Kodak's legendary IR film for many years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, just for the heck of it I stuck an R72 on a 50mm 1.8 on my D70.

 

I shot it pretty much the way I shoot IR film-I was using the older AF 50mm(not even AF-D) which does have an IR index mark, so I just eyeballed distances and put them at the mark on the lens. Unfortunately, a lot of newer lenses don't have any kind of mark at all.

 

In any case, at ISO 1600, I was able to get some decent images at handholdable shutter speeds although I was using the lens wide open. I was getting decent exposure in the 1/45-1/90 range. Of course, I metered manually and used the LCD as my guide.

 

I shot them as JPEGs and then hit desaturate and cranked up the red channel in Photoshop.

 

Here's a quick one out the back door. This is not an award winning photo by any means, but rather just a proof of concept.

 

DSC_8705.thumb.jpg.000734313cc23f4afd2ac1e964c0723c.jpg

 

I tried two other roughly contemporary cameras-a D2x and a Fuji FinePix S3 Pro. The latter is a Nikon N80 stuffed with weird proprietary Fuji sensor that used some tricks to enhance dynamic range(for those who don't remember these interesting little footnotes in camera history, the Fuji DSLRs actually found a decently popular niche with wedding and portrait photographers for a while-the photographer at my sister's wedding in 2005 used one exclusively). Both needed exposures ranging into the seconds at f/1.8 and ISO 1600 to register anything with the IR filter in place.

 

I've now found myself with two D70s, or rather a D70 and D70s, and I have to admit a temptation to either attempt full IR conversion myself or send one off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Any way you slice it an infrared camera is gonna cost you a bit. If you have an android and are on a budget the I would get the small "seek compact thermal images for android." I would get something made by FLIR like the "FLIR E60" if money wasn't an issue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

The Leica M8 is pretty sensitive to IR. Leica had to offer IR cut filters to those who complained that their blacks were magenta tinted.

 

Re lens markings. Few have an IR setting, I have a 50mm lens with the IR mark beside f2 on the DoF scale. That's the f2 on the infinity side of the scale. So having focused using normal light, shorten the distance by that amount. Elsewhere I've seen a recommendation to use the f5 mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...