INFRARED CAMERAS AND LENS COMBINATIONS

[billydodson]

<p>I'm going to buy a Nikon D90 and immediately do the infrared conversion on it. I'm looking for a quality zoom lens to marry up with it. The 24-120mm VR looks great ... and I notice that Tokina makes a 16.5-135mm that offers even more range. Does anyone have any experience with either of these lenses or have other recommendations for infrared use? Thanks in advance.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>The 24-120 VR is one of those odd items that seems to be like the elephant being described by blind men. If you dig around online you'll see such wildly different opinions you'll wonder whether everyone is describing the same lens.</p>

<p>I found it satisfactory with my D2H. It was entirely comparable to my 18-70 DX (in shot-for-shot comparisons from 24-70mm with each). Oddly, the 18-70 DX is widely praised as a good lens, while web lore seems to regard the 24-120 VR as a mediocre lens. I suspect it's a matter of economy: the 18-70 DX is a very good buy; the 24-120 VR is a good buy only if you need VR. But that's probably true of most VR lenses. Some folks can benefit from that feature, some can handhold steadily enough they don't need it. I'd get another, tho' I'd first test the 16-85 VR or 18-200 VR as well. I can't handhold steadily enough below 1/125th to get most shots in focus, so the VR is useful to me.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/27861231@N04/sets/72157606221394348/"><strong>Here's a link</strong></a> to 10 high resolution JPEGs from my D2H with the 24-120 VR, all handheld, most using VR. If I'm recalling correctly those are all straight from my D2H, no post processing, just my favorite in-camera JPEG settings. There are notes accompanying most sample photos and a few with those mouse-over notes (neat feature with Flickr). EXIF data should be intact for all as well.</p>

[michael_bradtke]

<p>I have had two different cameras converted to IR. They both behaved a little differently with different lenses. You will have to do some trial and error work before you find which lens works best for your camera.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>I can't comment on fast zooms, but for what it's worth I've had reasonable results from a plastic fantastic 28-200 f/3.5-5.6 G, used with an R72 and both HIE in an F5 and on an (unmodified) D700. If you're shooting fairly stopped-down because the autofocus doesn't work (although presumably you'll have Live View that might give you more options than I had on the F5), it's a decently sharp lens. It won't help if you want wider than 28mm, faster than f/3.5 or VR, of course - but I can vouch for it as a cheap-and-light option, if you can still find one. HTH.</p>

[akira]

<p>If you are not yet familiar to this website:<br /> http://www.naturfotograf.com/</p>

<p>Click "Lenses" link in the frame on the left and you will get lots of useful info on the IR capable lenses and known issues. Michael's advice is worth keeping in your mind, too.</p>

[tony_correa1]

<p>On my IR converted DX body, the lens I've found best to pair it with is the Nikon 18-200VR. The 18-70 has also worked well, but the 18-200 has VR and is sharper in the IR range, at least when comparing my lens copy. Both lenses seem to AF fine in the IR range. I typically would shot in the f/8-11 range so any slight focus errors are negated. The 24-120 is an ok lens. Not as bad as some folks on the net like to parrot. My biggest issue with the 24-120 is distortion - not the lens I'd use to photograph brick walls - if that's your thing. For a walk around or event lens, I like the 24-120 on an FX body.</p>

[curt wiler]

<p>As Billy seems to understand, the suitability of lenses for IR use is often entirely different than normal use. I can only vouch for the 16-85 which has been superb on my converted D200. When the conversion was made, I had the focus adjusted for this specific lens and the autofocus seems to be right on at the focal lengths I normally shoot IR (around 25-40 mm). Bjorn often includes IR suitability in his lens reviews so I suggest you start looking there (see the link above).</p>

[billydodson]

<p>Thanks to all for this. I've already done a little infrared stuff on my last Africa trip .... there are a couple of samples on my blog. It's here<br>

www.billydodson.com<br>

Trying something different has really rekindled my interest in photography and motivated me to get out there more. So I want to upgrade my equipment ... I'm currently using a D70 with an 18-70mm Nikon. The images have enlarged very nicely but my impression is that the bigger they are the better they're going to look. So I'm going for 12 megapixels and want a quality lens. I'm really curious about the Tokina 16.5-135mm but can't find any comments on it anywhere.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I've only read a little about IR conversions for dSLRs. One of the problems occasionally noted with some lenses is "hot spots". I'm not sure there's any way to predict whether a lens that's suitable for ordinary visible light spectrum photography will also perform well with IR, UV or other light. It's probably best to read recommendations by folks who've actually used the lenses you have in mind for IR.</p>

<p>Besides Bjorn Rorslett's excellent site, there's also some good info on <a href="http://www.momentcorp.com/review/ir.html">Frederik Rasmussen's momentcorp.com site</a>. Several examples of photos taken with IR converted cameras (LifePixel, I think), and the performance of various lenses with those converted dSLRs.</p>

[narayan]

<p>On my IR converted D50, I have observed hot spots with the 18-70mm DX and 14-24mm lenses. But my 18-55mm DX lens works great.</p>

[billydodson]

<p>Thanks for the updates ... I had some hotspots with my 18-70mm and called Life Pixel about it. They advised me to remove the UV filter ... I did so and the hot spots went away.</p>

[AndyMiller]

<p>Hi There, I use an Infrared Converted D100 and I read all sorts of things about IR, cameras, lenses, hot spots and their cause before I took the plunge. Some people maintain that hotspots are the result of internal reflections. Whatever the truth of the matter I trust Bjørn's site above. This <a href="http://www.crhfoto.co.uk/crh/digital%20infra-red/digital-ir.htm">LINK</a> is helpful about IR and workflow And this <a href="http://www.crhfoto.co.uk/crh/digital%20infra-red/digital-ir.htm">LINK</a> is very helpful about lens choices for IR and hot spots - it is part if the Lloyd Chambers Guide to Infrared Digital Photography e-book, it requires subscription - but if you take up IR photography I find it well worth the sub. It takes you through everything and lists lenses, bodies and other stuff, both Nikon & Canon which work with IR. Personally I use mainly a 17-35 mm f2.8 Nikkor or 24-70 f2.8 AFs or 70-200 f2.8 AFs. I have also used my 16 mm Fisheye - all work perfectly well with the D100 IR.</p>