infrared filters - worth the purchase?

[ClickClick]

I don't exactly have a few hundred sitting around to send off with a body and have it IR converted. Are the filters available any good? Has anyone used one? Tips? Examples?

many thanks

[SamHunter]

I know plenty of people use the Hoya R72 and get good results, the only issue is that you need like a 30 second shutter speed

[argyle]

Yes and no. If you're taking pictures of static objects, then they'll suffice. If the subject has any movement whatsoever, then no. Because of the fairly long exposure times that are needed, foliage and clouds will appear OOF in the image, even in the slightest breeze. Also, a tripod is pretty much mandatory. I tried using a Hoya R72 IR filter, didn't like the shortcomings, and finally gave in and had a spare body converted. At the time, the conversion cost was just a little bit more than the price of the filter (77mm).

Using a filter may be a relatively inexpensive way to experiment with IR to see if you like it...then you can make a decision if you want to jump in and get a body conversion. TBH, the body is the way to go. You're simply taking a picture the way that you normally would...TTL metering, a wide array of lenses that won't give hot spots, and very little need for a tripod.

From what I found, R72 filters smaller than 77mm are not that expensive. Once you get to 77mm and larger, the cost jumps considerably.

[ClickClick]

Well I was hoping to use it for something like a beach scene... but the water moves. Unless it can become that "creamy" like texture you usually see with long exposures.

I don't have any extra body laying around, I do have a Powershot A95 but not sure if that is convert-ible.

Maybe I can find a used XT online for a decent price.

[ClickClick]

Although looking at the site most people use, it says that the camera would be calibrated for the 50 1.8 lens. Or we have to send our prefered choice of lens in with it.

Is that correct? I can't swap lens out once it has been calibrated?

[argyle]

No...I wouldn't be too worried about that (although ultrawide lenses may perform differently). There was a list posted on here a while back that listed a while slew of lenses that are compatible with a converted body (by compatible, I mean that they were tested to show that they do not yield a hot spot on the image). I sent in an older 10D body for conversion (no lens), and everything worked out fine. The following test picture was taken with the 10D and the 17-40L lens. EXIF was f/11 at 1/180 sec, 35mm focal length. The same shot, if taken with an R72 filter, probably would have been closer to 15 or 20 seconds (which would have blurred the pond reeds and the clouds).

http://northlake.smugmug.com/photos/203331061_nWnwi-L.jpg

[John_B]

ClickClick,
I have a Hoya R72 filter and it works great with all my DSLR's (to my eyes). I do like taking IR photos occasionally but not enough to pay and have a camera converted, as I see in true color not false or red and white :) I made an IR photo page that shows the basics of using a Hoya R72 filter with some photos <-- click to see (http://johnbdigital.com/infrared/infrared_howto.php)

Here is the most recent IR photo I took with a Canon 40D, EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 lens with quick color correction in software (to give false colors).

Big Island IR
http://johnbdigital.com/infrared/big_island_ir.jpg
click for specs (http://johnbdigital.com/infrared/big_island_ir.htm)


argyle,
You keep showing that one photo, please show some others you have taken ;)

[argyle]

argyle,
You keep showing that one photo, please show some others you have taken ;)

You keeping track, John? :D Actually, I'm embarassed to admit that its the only one that I have loaded onto my smugmug page for easy posting. :o I'm still going through a ton of pics from Bryce Canyon, Zion NP, Antelope, and Havasu Canyon. Just don't have time to get to other stuff at the moment. But now that everything's green here in TX, I need to find some time to break out the IR camera.

That's a nice shot you posted there, John. Great composition and PP.

[John_B]

You keeping track, John?
argyle,
Its just good photos easily are remembered :) :lol:
I am looking forward to see more ;)

[ClickClick]

No...I wouldn't be too worried about that (although ultrawide lenses may perform differently). There was a list posted on here a while back that listed a while slew of lenses that are compatible with a converted body (by compatible, I mean that they were tested to show that they do not yield a hot spot on the image). I sent in an older 10D body for conversion (no lens), and everything worked out fine. The following test picture was taken with the 10D and the 17-40L lens. EXIF was f/11 at 1/180 sec, 35mm focal length. The same shot, if taken with an R72 filter, probably would have been closer to 15 or 20 seconds (which would have blurred the pond reeds and the clouds).

http://northlake.smugmug.com/photos/203331061_nWnwi-L.jpg


OMG. What was your PP workflow like.

[argyle]

Actually, nothing that complicated. First, you need to set a custom white balance in your camera. You do this by taking a picture of something that's green (I used my front lawn), then set this as the CWB. The result is that anything green will be rendered as white. I just shot in RAW, did a few basic tweaks and a bit of sharpening. I adjusted the sky color by playing with the blue and red channels. BTW...I went with the standard (basic) conversion by Lifepixel.

[JDubya]

This was taken with a HOYA R72 and the kit lens.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v69/SpeakerPhreaker/InfraredClockTower.jpg

It's a fun filter. I'd love to have a body converted but for now I'll stick to a filter and long exposures.

[Blue S2]

Filters drove me crazy after a while. I just bought a factory refurbished XT on ebay for like $200 and sent it to LifePixel for conversion. It's the best option if you are serious about IR. Composing normally, using normal exposure values, shooting moving objects, etc... is such a creative force with IR. The filter really hampered things. Filters work great...but a converted camera is IR freedom!

[Jon]

Actually, nothing that complicated. First, you need to set a custom white balance in your camera. You do this by taking a picture of something that's green (I used my front lawn), then set this as the CWB. The result is that anything green will be rendered as white. I just shot in RAW, did a few basic tweaks and a bit of sharpening. I adjusted the sky color by playing with the blue and red channels. BTW...I went with the standard (basic) conversion by Lifepixel.A lawn's good, but not just because it's green. You want to set your WB on healthy vegetation, since in addition to green, healthy vegetation reflects strongly in the IR band. That's one reason IR is used in crop assessment; ailing or stressed crops won't have as strong an IR signature.

[ClickClick]

This was taken with a HOYA R72 and the kit lens.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v69/SpeakerPhreaker/InfraredClockTower.jpg

It's a fun filter. I'd love to have a body converted but for now I'll stick to a filter and long exposures.


how long was your exposure time for that shot?

[ClickClick]

Filters drove me crazy after a while. I just bought a factory refurbished XT on ebay for like $200 and sent it to LifePixel for conversion. It's the best option if you are serious about IR. Composing normally, using normal exposure values, shooting moving objects, etc... is such a creative force with IR. The filter really hampered things. Filters work great...but a converted camera is IR freedom!


Which lens do you use on the converted XT now? What was the overall price that Lifepixel charged you?

[JDubya]

how long was your exposure time for that shot?

Unfortunately, I lost the original file with EXIF intact. My guess is somewhere between 10 and 20 seconds though.

[Blue S2]

It was about $400 for the conversion from lifepixel. Well worth it as they are top notch in their service and support.

I got the normal IR-only conversion. They set the camera's focus up for the 50 1.8 by default unless you request otherwise. (not to set up, or to set up with a custom lens of your choice)

I honestly find the focus to be pretty darn good with most lenses. I've used all my lenses with the camera. I've done macro with my 100mm, i've used my fisheye, etc... I regularly keep the 35L on it, but often if doing landscapes I use the 24-105L on it for the wider end. I might actually get the 17-40L to keep on the IR camera full time.

Here is a direct link to my IR gallery. 95% is with the LifePixel XT conversion using various lenses from what I own. A couple are with the 5D and a filter. The exif data is present if you hover over the right hand image and click photo info.

http://gallery.soundvisionpassion.com/gallery/2686742_eaaSU#266886319_cJKNU

[ClickClick]

It was about $400 for the conversion from lifepixel. Well worth it as they are top notch in their service and support.

I got the normal IR-only conversion. They set the camera's focus up for the 50 1.8 by default unless you request otherwise. (not to set up, or to set up with a custom lens of your choice)

I honestly find the focus to be pretty darn good with most lenses. I've used all my lenses with the camera. I've done macro with my 100mm, i've used my fisheye, etc... I regularly keep the 35L on it, but often if doing landscapes I use the 24-105L on it for the wider end. I might actually get the 17-40L to keep on the IR camera full time.

Here is a direct link to my IR gallery. 95% is with the LifePixel XT conversion using various lenses from what I own. A couple are with the 5D and a filter. The exif data is present if you hover over the right hand image and click photo info.

http://gallery.soundvisionpassion.com/gallery/2686742_eaaSU#266886319_cJKNU


Awesome info.

Because the lens that I would probably be using the most are the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the Sig 10-20.

And those IR pics with the blue sky are brilliant. I hope I can find some decent tutorials around to hone my skills with when I get my camera converted.

[Blue S2]

LifePixel actually offers a pretty decent DVD on IR editing. I recommend it if you are new to this. Otherwise, there are quite a few tutorials online.

Whats nice about IR is that its not something our eyes can see. So any IR image is an interpretation. Some people like the traditional black and white...but IR works great for false color, toning, selective color, and other techniques and emulations of old processes. Its a pretty good starting point for creativity.