This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you.

 Moderated by: chrisbet, Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2   
Nikon cameras suitable for IR conversion.   -   Page   2
 Rating:  Rating
AuthorPost



Posted: Sat Jan 11th, 2014 09:56
 
11th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
Well that worked well as a first shot.

I have gone from this as a NEF.


Attachment: Screen Shot 2014-01-11 at 16.54.20.jpg (Downloaded 43 times)



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sat Jan 11th, 2014 09:59
 
12th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
To a 'finished' effort that looks like this. Not as I want it but it was only a test shot so it doesnt warrant spending loads of time on it.

Attachment: Screen Shot 2014-01-11 at 15.42.23.jpg (Downloaded 43 times)



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sun Jan 12th, 2014 13:26
 
13th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4572
Status: 
Offline
jk wrote:
To a 'finished' effort that looks like this. Not as I want it but it was only a test shot so it doesnt warrant spending loads of time on it.

The image seems to have vignetting. What lens was it ?

It looks to me as if the highlights has been pushed a tad too far.

One of the 'tricks' with IR (IMHO) is to make the foliage secondary to non IR responsive elements. I know this was just a test shot but the image needs a non IR focal point. Apologies if I am stating the obvious.

Try getting under one of those trees and shooting 'up the non IR responsive trunk' to the white canopy.



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Sun Jan 12th, 2014 13:40
 
14th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
Eric wrote:
jk wrote:
To a 'finished' effort that looks like this. Not as I want it but it was only a test shot so it doesnt warrant spending loads of time on it.

The image seems to have vignetting. What lens was it ?

Sigma 10-20 I guess.


It looks to me as if the highlights has been pushed a tad too far.


Yes that is me being a bit heavy handed.
Also the foliage is a little blue but I was concentrating on getting the sky blue.


One of the 'tricks' with IR (IMHO) is to make the foliage secondary to non IR responsive elements. I know this was just a test shot but the image needs a non IR focal point. Apologies if I am stating the obvious.

Try getting under one of those trees and shooting 'up the non IR responsive trunk' to the white canopy.


Will do but the pines tend to be less IR responsive than deciduous trees.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sun Jan 12th, 2014 19:17
 
15th Post
Robert



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: South Lakeland, UK
Posts: 4066
Status: 
Offline
Some of the Sigma 10-20's don't respond well in the IR range, they seem to hotspot badly which may explain the vignetting, perhaps it isn't vignetting but hotspotting? I have had mixed results with my Sigma 10-20 I think Eric found it hotspotted badly on his D70 but I have had a little success on the D1, although not universal success.

I have spent days on a single image and while I may EVENTUALLY have got the effect I visualised when I composed the image, having spent so much time on it the image is badly degraded. I then try to retrace my footsteps and re-create the same image with the minimal of steps from the original NEF In my experience fiddling with an image for days ends up degrading it and making it muddy with a low IQ.

Sometime it take several attempts to minimise the steps to the clean image I know It can reveal. Then I wonder why I bothered!!! LOL But then I do enjoy the results in the end when I look back.

Too much :wine: I am celebrating, I have got my gas cooker self ignition to work!!! Only take me three years to pluck up courage to pull the cooker apart and repair the switch! Yea, I can put my camping ignitor away!!!



____________________
Robert.

 




Posted: Sat Jan 18th, 2014 05:38
 
16th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4572
Status: 
Offline
Robert wrote:
Some of the Sigma 10-20's don't respond well in the IR range, they seem to hotspot badly which may explain the vignetting, perhaps it isn't vignetting but hotspotting? I have had mixed results with my Sigma 10-20 I think Eric found it hotspotted badly on his D70 but I have had a little success on the D1, although not universal success.

I have spent days on a single image and while I may EVENTUALLY have got the effect I visualised when I composed the image, having spent so much time on it the image is badly degraded. I then try to retrace my footsteps and re-create the same image with the minimal of steps from the original NEF In my experience fiddling with an image for days ends up degrading it and making it muddy with a low IQ.

Sometime it take several attempts to minimise the steps to the clean image I know It can reveal. Then I wonder why I bothered!!! LOL But then I do enjoy the results in the end when I look back.

Too much :wine: I am celebrating, I have got my gas cooker self ignition to work!!! Only take me three years to pluck up courage to pull the cooker apart and repair the switch! Yea, I can put my camping ignitor away!!!


I suppose having seen how badly the 24-70 hotspots, I am more forgiving of the hotspot from the Sigma 10-20. Back then it was an irritation and a let down having the centre of an image 'fogged'.

But as this failing is a feature in many, if not most lenses to some degree, I guess you have to live with it. That's why I like the 17-35....no hotspot at all (don't ask my why). Sadly it limits mid distance work. But the 80-200 AFS is also fog free. So another keeper!

I am not so sure that JKs image is hotspotting though. Usually with hot spots they are associated with high contrast areas near the centre of the image (making the 'fogging' more obvious). I don't see that scenario in JKs image...the centre is all similar tones. Also, the lighter middle does seem symmetrical. I wondered if if was a cloud effect. They do get clouds in Spain dont they...Not sure?



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Sat Jan 18th, 2014 05:50
 
17th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4572
Status: 
Offline
jk wrote:
Eric wrote:
jk wrote:
To a 'finished' effort that looks like this. Not as I want it but it was only a test shot so it doesnt warrant spending loads of time on it.

The image seems to have vignetting. What lens was it ?

Sigma 10-20 I guess.


It looks to me as if the highlights has been pushed a tad too far.


Yes that is me being a bit heavy handed.
Also the foliage is a little blue but I was concentrating on getting the sky blue.


One of the 'tricks' with IR (IMHO) is to make the foliage secondary to non IR responsive elements. I know this was just a test shot but the image needs a non IR focal point. Apologies if I am stating the obvious.

Try getting under one of those trees and shooting 'up the non IR responsive trunk' to the white canopy.


Will do but the pines tend to be less IR responsive than deciduous trees.


Yes, deciduous are best.

One of the most interesting time is when they start to bud. You can get little white 'lanterns' against a mostly dark background.


This has whetted my apetite...going to get the IR camera out ready.

:thumbsup:



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Sat Jan 18th, 2014 09:03
 
18th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
Robert wrote: Some of the Sigma 10-20's don't respond well in the IR range, they seem to hotspot badly which may explain the vignetting, perhaps it isn't vignetting but hotspotting? I have had mixed results with my Sigma 10-20 I think Eric found it hotspotted badly on his D70 but I have had a little success on the D1, although not universal success.

I have spent days on a single image and while I may EVENTUALLY have got the effect I visualised when I composed the image, having spent so much time on it the image is badly degraded. I then try to retrace my footsteps and re-create the same image with the minimal of steps from the original NEF In my experience fiddling with an image for days ends up degrading it and making it muddy with a low IQ.

Sometime it take several attempts to minimise the steps to the clean image I know It can reveal. Then I wonder why I bothered!!! LOL But then I do enjoy the results in the end when I look back.

Too much :wine: I am celebrating, I have got my gas cooker self ignition to work!!! Only take me three years to pluck up courage to pull the cooker apart and repair the switch! Yea, I can put my camping ignitor away!!!

My Sigma 10-24 is a version1 release of the lens and is exceptionally good for a zoom and shows very little hotspotting.  In fact it is so negligible that a couple of passes with the burn tool gets rid of any effects (it is probably about +0.15EV or +0.1 EV in strength).

Glad that this IR talk has whetted you appetite Eric.
I am looking for a Fuji S3 Pro UV-IR body as I believe that they have the best solution if I want to also do UV.  However I am not convinced that it will be better than my Nikon D70 IR converted when used for IR.
I blame my interest on Robert and our visit to Westonbirt when we discussed this and Robert showed me his D1 UV converted camera and lights.  I really fancy having a go with the UV spectrum as we have so much more sunshine here in Spain also I have a UV torch I can use.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 

Reply
1st new
This is topic ID = 833     Current time is 05:08 Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2     
Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Specialised Photography - Macro, UV, IR, Underwater > Nikon cameras suitable for IR conversion. Top

Users viewing this topic

Post quick reply

Go to top
Go to end
Messages
Home
Recent topics
Unread posts
Last posts
Splash

Current theme is Modern editor



A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you.


Hosted by Octarine Services

UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0590 seconds (67% database + 33% PHP). 78 queries executed.