diego.elizalde

Tze, You should definitely give your 5000 a try. It may surprise you! As far as IR filters, I'd reccommend two of them: Cokin 007 (if you use the Cokin system), which sells at about $50, and the hoya R72. On this one, the price varies depending on filter size.

Infrared filters are designed to block visible light. Some of them block more than others, but this makes exposure times longer. I use the cokin filter, and allows only enough visible light to make exposure times manageable. I shoot at ISO 100 with exposure settings of + - 1 second @ F 8. By blocking the visible light, the camera is able to make the exposure with infrared light.

Ian - You are certainly right. These days, infrared light is not welcomed in equipment design. Thank goodness for old equipment!

Here is an example I got from some tests I was running yesterday at the golf course by home.<div></div>

LOL - Yes, sorry I couldnt post any examples yet, cause I am at work now (I hope my boss is not a member here!). I will post examples later on tonight, from home :)

Diego.

-----Infrared Sensitivity Test - Nikon D80 (18-135 mm lens)-----

--Background--

I have been shooting Nikon film cameras (and some medium format TLRs) for the

past 10 years, and I have always been amazed by infrared (IR) photography.

When I made the switch to digital recently, I was really excited to finally

get to explore IR photography in a convenient way (something I never did with

film due to the cost and inconsistency of film-based IR photography).

I went on a 4 hr road trip to shoot IR landscapes with my new D80. I had a

great subject in mind (the PGE wind farm in the central Oregon high desert),

and the day was great for shooting. I tried all kinds of exposures, framing,

and subjects. I tried different ISO settings, different angles to the sun,

different types of foliage, and different times of the day ? and all

combinations thereof. The results were terrible. The D-80 poor IR radiation

sensitivity means you have to modify exposure times, allowing more visible

light to be absorbed, which diminishes any IR effect you may get.

Let me elaborate on this; The D80?s low infrared sensitivity is by no means a

defect, or a disadvantage. The placement of the hot mirror filter in between

the lens and the CCD is a valid effort from Nikon to further ?clean up?

captures made the way they design the camera to be used: visible light!! In

this effort to clean up the image, their IR filtering technology apparently

evolved since the D70, and this filter appears to work very efficiently on the

D80, which causes big disappointment for those of us who want to finally be

able to shoot infrared, taking advantage of digital?s instant feedback.

Well, I came back home from my little trip with about 1.7 GB of RAW files,

which were a great disappointment. The skies are darker than normal, and the

clouds are a bit brighter than usual, but the foliage looks the same as just

using a red filter (not an infrared one). It just looked like a B&W photo

taken with a Red 29 filter on.

So, I decided to do a one-on-one comparison between the D80, and my abandoned

(not anymore) Nikon Coolpix 4500.

--Test--

The way I ran this test is as follows:

Tripod mounted camera

ISO 100

Exposure was manual mode, 1 second @ F10

I used a Comcast Universal TV-type remote control as a source of IR light.

No IR Filter was used on either camera. Just the naked lens.

---Nikon D80 (18-135 mm zoom lens) Results:

The image was correctly exposed overall. You can barely see two washed-out,

brighter dots on the front of the remote, which are the remote?s infrared

lights used to communicate with the TV. These spots were visible only after

zooming in, and were hard to find.

---Nikon Coolpix 4500 Results:

The image had the same overall density of exposure as the one produced with

the Nikon D80, with only one difference: The remote?s infrared lights were as

bright as car headlights! The 4500 CCD must be dozens of times more sensitive

to IR light than the D80!

I immediately took the 4500 off the tripod, scotch-taped my Cokin 007 IR

filter to the lens, and took a shot on Auto-Exposure mode out the window. The

camera metered correctly (matrix mode), performed an accurate Auto-Focus

operation, and I immediately got a great looking IR photograph. I honestly

almost had a heart attack when I saw the results.

My test confirms the D80?s low IR sensitivity, but it also gives hope, because

you can find an old Coolpix series camera for less than what a Razor Cell

Phone costs, and you can make that your designated IR camera, and fine tune it

for that purpose (custom White Balance, etc), and keep your D80 for what its

meant to photograph: Visible Light!

I hope this test was informative to you all, and happy IR shooting.

Diego E.

Portland, Oregon.

Ok, I just finished my experiments with my new Nikon D80, and it SUCKS for IR capture. Sure, you can stick a R72 piece of glass in front of it, but you?ll never get a good IR effect.

I went on a 4 hr road trip to shoot IR landscapes this past weekend, and I tried all kinds of exposures, framing, and subjects. Different ISO settings, different angles to the sun, different types of foliage, and different times of the day ? and all combinations thereof. The results were terrible. The D-80 poor IR radiation sensitivity means you have to modify exposure times, allowing more visible light to be absorbed, which will diminish any IR effect you may get.

Well, I came back home with about 1.7 GB of RAW files, which are all in the garbage now. So, I decided to try a test: I grabbed a TV remote, my brand new D80, and my OLD Coolpix 4500.

I set up a tripod shot, ISO 100, 1 second exposure @ F10. I took the exposure of the front of the TV remote while holding the volume up button. On the D80, the infrared light from the remote is barely visible, only after zooming in, and even then, it looks like a washed out, lighter, blurry spot.

Then, it was the 4500?s turn. Same shot, same exposure/ISO. The infrared light from the remote looked like the headlights of a car!!!! OMFG!!! I almost had a heart attack when I saw the results.

I immediately grabbed the 4500, turned towards the window, and shot outside to the trees and the sky. OMFG, I could see the results even on the LCD screen, the coolpix 4500 is soooo sensitive to IR!!!!!!! It even meters correctly (on matrix mode) and focuses correctly!! You can use it as an IR point and shoot if you want to!!

Anyway, I hope this puts a final note on the D-80 and infrared. The D-80 is NOT the camera for you if you want to shoot a lot of infrared, and do not wanna have your IR filter on the CCD removed.

It appears to be the general consensus on the web that the D80 performs similar to the D70 on IR, and that is just NOT true.

Awesome! Thanks for your fast response!

:-)

I couldnt find a post regarding this, so I thought I would post this question.

I recently got a Nikon D80, with the 18-135 Zoom. Behind the glass on the

front, inside the lens, there are 4 or 5 small dust specs, and a 2 mm line

(possibly a scratch - it looks like when you blow on a lens to clean it, and a

small drop of saliva makes like a streak). I was wondering if anyone knows if

this will have a noticeable impact on image quality.

Thanks, and happy shooting!

D.