Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Still Life, B/W & Experimental Talk 
Thread started 09 Jan 2018 (Tuesday) 00:20
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What camera for infrared conversion in 2018?

 
Silver-Halide
Senior Member
792 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 216
Joined Jan 2015
     
Jan 09, 2018 00:20 |  #1

I've searched previous threads here but discussions are 6 years old and there are a lot newer options today. I'm a Canon shooter but not opposed to picking up a second system. Read through a lot of Life Pixel's website and they say mirrorless is ideal for on-sensor focusing. I like the idea of a Fuji moreso than a Sony. Primary use will be landscapes shot midday, and I'm thinking of the super color conversion since its supposedly the most versatile without use of filters. But most mirrorless Fuji's are about 16mpx and $1,000 with no lens. I could grab a Canon M5, but then I'd need to drop $200 just on an EF lens converter if I want to use the likes of my 24-70 f/4L IS or 16-35 F/4L IS. Both great lenses that I think would be great to use. So that kinda brings me back to Canon. Since I could get a 77D for say $700 I think that's the most cost effective way to go, but then I'd have to use live view. For what its worth I prefer bigger body cameras and never really liked the idea of the smallish buttons on a camera. Comments?

Thanks!


Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
joeseph
"smells like turd"
Avatar
9,477 posts
Gallery: 59 photos
Likes: 1340
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
     
Jan 12, 2018 17:16 |  #2

Silver-Halide wrote in post #18536827 (external link)
Since I could get a 77D for say $700 I think that's the most cost effective way to go, but then I'd have to use live view.

If the camera is properly converted, it should focus just fine so I'm not sure what you mean "have to use liveview" ?


some fairly old canon camera stuff, canon lenses, Manfrotto "thingy", 1D MK II converted for IR, and now an M5
TF posting: here :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
792 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 216
Joined Jan 2015
     
Jan 12, 2018 23:47 |  #3

Not sure myself. AFAIK they can calibrate the camera to a lens, but only to one specific focal length(?). IIRC it has to do with the fact that infrared and visible light don't focus at the same wavelengths or something.


Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joeseph
"smells like turd"
Avatar
9,477 posts
Gallery: 59 photos
Likes: 1340
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
     
Jan 13, 2018 03:06 |  #4

To be honest, I don't think this would be a problem for landscape photography - I didn't do any sort of calibration or adjustment at all when I converted my 1D2, and so long as I have a decent depth of field aperture (f/8 etc) , all looks good. Probably cameras that do microadjust would be useful if you're needing to shoot very thin dof, but not sure if this is really needed for what you're wanting?

I do know that my 1D2 camera isn't terribly accurate when focusing, but I haven't been bothered with the results enough to pull the camera apart and change the sensor plane to get it any closer to where it should be. I modified a 10D previously, and that was fairly similar.

If I see a 1D3 cheap enough, I might upgrade...

(10D at f/8 example below)


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


some fairly old canon camera stuff, canon lenses, Manfrotto "thingy", 1D MK II converted for IR, and now an M5
TF posting: here :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
792 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 216
Joined Jan 2015
     
Jan 14, 2018 12:54 |  #5

joeseph wrote in post #18539900 (external link)
To be honest, I don't think this would be a problem for landscape photography - I didn't do any sort of calibration or adjustment at all when I converted my 1D2, and so long as I have a decent depth of field aperture (f/8 etc) , all looks good. Probably cameras that do microadjust would be useful if you're needing to shoot very thin dof, but not sure if this is really needed for what you're wanting?

I do know that my 1D2 camera isn't terribly accurate when focusing, but I haven't been bothered with the results enough to pull the camera apart and change the sensor plane to get it any closer to where it should be. I modified a 10D previously, and that was fairly similar.

If I see a 1D3 cheap enough, I might upgrade...

(10D at f/8 example below)


thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by joeseph in
./showthread.php?p=185​39900&i=i23619683
forum: Still Life, B/W & Experimental Talk

Thanks. Nope, lots of DOF is fine, as It will be a landscape camera.


Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cmosman
Senior Member
Avatar
449 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 191
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Essex, England
     
Apr 24, 2018 07:53 |  #6

I have had a canon 50D converted, and this is from last weekend with a 10‑18mm f4.5‑5.6 EFs IS STM attached


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Cameras & Lens all due to my kind wife :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
792 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 216
Joined Jan 2015
     
Apr 24, 2018 08:46 as a reply to  @ cmosman's post |  #7

Cool thanks. Have you had any problems with IR hot spots on that lens?


Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wunhang
Senior Member
Avatar
689 posts
Likes: 41
Joined Nov 2009
Location: SoCal
Post edited 3 months ago by wunhang.
     
Apr 24, 2018 09:06 as a reply to  @ Silver-Halide's post |  #8

You don't need to worry about hotspots on lenses with a converted camera. When people talk about the hotspots, they're talking about using filters that filter out everything else but IR and since unconverted cameras have the IR blocking filter on the sensor, they have to go to pretty high shutter speeds which may cause issues with hotspots being focused onto the sensor.

::Edit::
Let me clarify - IR hotspots are still a concern but less so when you can operate the camera without needing minutes per exposure on a tripod like you would if you used filters on an unconverted camera. You would be able to see the hot spot pretty fast (on liveview or review) and adjust your aperture or framing to remove it. I treat hotspots on IR much like sunspots / flaring in normal photography - move the angle or change the aperture or shade the lens as needed.


Canon 5D IV | Canon 5D II | XSI (Infrared modified) | SL1 | 16-35mm L f/4.0 IS | 24-70mm L f/2.8 II | 40mm f/2.8 | 85mm f/1.8 | 70-200mm L f/4.0 IS | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 | C/Y 28mm f/2.8 | Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC | C/Y 50mm f/1.7 | Zeiss 100mm MP
::SmugMug (external link)::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cmosman
Senior Member
Avatar
449 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 191
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Essex, England
     
Apr 25, 2018 07:37 |  #9

No problem at all with hotspots with my converted 50D, and have used Canon 18-200, 24mm pancake and 10-18 EFS.


Cameras & Lens all due to my kind wife :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CHillyDoggy
Goldmember
Avatar
1,261 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 906
Joined Apr 2011
Location: St. Augustine, FL
     
May 28, 2018 14:54 |  #10

Just sent my old 7D to Spencers Camera to have it converted. Looking forward to getting out and playing with it in about another week when it returns.


Craig Hill Photography (external link) / Craig Hill Photography on Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
daleg
Senior Member
614 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 106
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Maryland, USA
     
May 28, 2018 15:41 |  #11

fwiw, I've heard that the SL1 (or 2) is at the top of the currently "favored" Canon bodies for IR conversion.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,096 views & 4 likes for this thread
What camera for infrared conversion in 2018?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Still Life, B/W & Experimental Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is racin06
726 guests, 309 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.