Announcement

Collapse

December's CHALLENGE

The topic to inspire your creative juices this month is BOXES Please don't forget to vote on November's LEAVES challenge and please re-vote if you already did but before the recent forum upgrade.

See more
See less

E-M5 MkI converted to IR

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: E-M5 MkI converted to IR

    Here are some pics... taken with my phone, so not the best but you get the idea.

    Additional info:
    * Screen protector since new
    * 1168 shutter count
    * Strap shown in pictures not included
    * Lens shown in pictures not included
    * Only first part of battery grip is attached. Other part is included







    Steve

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: E-M5 MkI converted to IR

      Originally posted by raichea View Post

      The IR conversion uses a 665nm IR filter to allow false colour shots to be created. In order to take traditional 720nm IR images, you need to add a 720nm filter to the lens.
      Interesting idea, get the best of both worlds! Does this work 100% with the 720nm filter? The images look good but does it always work?

      What made you want to sell your conversion? Seems an ideal camera to have.

      Final question, which lenses do you find work OK with the conversion, some lenses create a ghost in the centre on IR conversions due to the poor focusing of IR light.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: E-M5 MkI converted to IR

        Originally posted by Invicta View Post
        Interesting idea, get the best of both worlds! Does this work 100% with the 720nm filter? The images look good but does it always work?

        What made you want to sell your conversion? Seems an ideal camera to have.

        Final question, which lenses do you find work OK with the conversion, some lenses create a ghost in the centre on IR conversions due to the poor focusing of IR light.
        A 665nm conversion images using wavelengths from 665nm to 1100nm. If you add a 720nm filter it blocks the light below 720nm so the result is the same as a 720nm conversion. You can also add a 850nm filter for even more intense IR effects, but a 590nm filter would still give 665nm images.


        Your final question is about 'Hot Spots' there are several lists on the internet of lenses that are supposedly good or bad for this, but I find conditions are too variable to really list the good lenses. One of my lenses produced terrible hot spots when I had a quick test using it for IR on a standard G1 (handheld shots were just possible) but on my modified GF2 it's never given one at all. I think I've since used it on a standard G5 without issue too - but with the G5 I was specifically after long exposures.


        As well as the body used the aperture used can have a significant impact on the hot spot a lens produces. Many lenses are worse shut down, but a few seem worse wide open. Then as with all flare type effects the lighting can have a dramatic effect...


        None of the native MFT lenses I've tried on my modified camera have given hot spots. I've only seen them on that with a c-mount lens (and only when using extension tubes IIRC)


        I can't help with the middle question as I've never sold a camera in my life!
        Mike
        Compulsive photographic Dabbler.
        Flickr

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: E-M5 MkI converted to IR

          Originally posted by Invicta View Post
          Interesting idea, get the best of both worlds! Does this work 100% with the 720nm filter? The images look good but does it always work?

          What made you want to sell your conversion? Seems an ideal camera to have.

          Final question, which lenses do you find work OK with the conversion, some lenses create a ghost in the centre on IR conversions due to the poor focusing of IR light.
          Always seems to work for me. Can't think why it wouldn't... the internal 665nm filter cuts anything with a shorter wavelength but lets longer wavelengths through. A 720nm screwed into the lens cuts anything shorter than 720.

          I guess, as filters aren't perfect, the combination of 665nm and 720nm attenuates the light a little compared to a single, internal 720nm filter but, if so, the exposure meter takes care of that and I doubt it's as much as 0.5 of a stop (and I suspect a lot less than that).

          I'm very happy with the E-M5 but I also have an E-M1 that I plan to convert and I don't need two IR cameras.

          I haven't tried many lenses... I tend to use the Tamron all the time. Most of the time I've never noticed a hot spot with this lens but I've seen a hint of one on one or two images out of the many I've taken - I've not noticed a pattern in the settings for those cases.

          This is a useful resource: https://kolarivision.com/articles/lens-hotspot-list/
          Steve

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: E-M5 MkI converted to IR

            Originally posted by raichea View Post
            I guess, as filters aren't perfect, the combination of 665nm and 720nm attenuates the light a little compared to a single, internal 720nm filter but, if so, the exposure meter takes care of that and I doubt it's as much as 0.5 of a stop (and I suspect a lot less than that).

            Nearly all the long pass IR filters I've looked at transmit at least 90% from around 20nm above their listed cut off. So the usual loss would be around 5% (1/10 stop). I think the only exception has been the 950nm which has a much more gradual transition, taking hundreds of nm to go from blocking to full transmission. Combining a 950 with an 850 would possibly show some differences in careful testing. Combinations of the other standard IR filters (excluding the 950) will produce results that would be very hard to tell from the longer wavelength filter on its own.
            Mike
            Compulsive photographic Dabbler.
            Flickr

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: E-M5 MkI converted to IR

              Thanks... interesting to hear some figures.
              Steve

              Comment


              • #22
                Steve

                Comment

                Working...
                X