Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2013 · 60d + Infrared Filter
  
 
andbott723
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 60d + Infrared Filter


Hey guys,
Looking to do some IR photo with a 60d.
Dont want to convert the camera, but looking at picking up one of those $100+ Hoya IR lens filters.
Would it be worth my time to use a 77mm lens filter on a 24-70 on an uncovered 60d?
Any info would be great!



Mar 05, 2013 at 04:04 PM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 60d + Infrared Filter


I would suspect it works, but you should do the IR test of your camera body first: take a photo with this camera (no matter which lens you use) in regular light of any remote control pointing against the camera. Do not use an IR filter here, just the camera setup which you use for regular color shots! Press any of the remote buttons and release the camera shutter button. If your camera's ICF/AA blocking filter is not too strong, you will see at least one bright dot of the infrared diode in your remote control through the plastic cover of the remote in your final photo. If you see a dark grey dot or even nothing, then your IR blocking filter in front of the sensor is too strong. In such case, you need to fully convert your camera to achieve decent IR photos.


Mar 05, 2013 at 04:09 PM
burningheart
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 60d + Infrared Filter


Retro has good advice for you.

The ICF/AA filters we have been told the newer ones block more IR and UV light. To buy an IR filter to test if it works could be money tossed away.

Keep in mind even with a IR715 you will get an image but it may have very little IR light, it may mostly be red light. The IR 715 allows red light through along with IR but if the sensor blocks the IR or most of it you really aren't getting IR photo just a photo of the red spectrum.

Years ago I did a test with my old unmodified 5DC and posted the info on another site (since I already had IR filters) and the response was

100mm macro @ ISO 50 F8 B+W 092(equivalent to IR715) 20 seconds
100mm macro @ ISO 50 F8 B+W 093(allows only IR light) 90 seconds

If the 60D filter blocks more IR than the old 5DC then your exposure times will be longer. You could decrease it by bumping up the ISO and opening the aperature.

Your best bet is try retro's suggestion or if someone here has an IR filter and 60D have them give it a shot and report back.



Mar 05, 2013 at 04:35 PM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 60d + Infrared Filter


Agree what burningheart states above! He is right with the filters, I think the 093 filter has a cutoff at 870 nm or something similar. This kind of filter leads to B&W only IR-converted photos (which I prefer most of the time, but I decided to go with 715 nm cutoff since it gives me flexibility in case I want to create a false color IR photo).

Increasing the ISO helps to reduce the exposure time with the filter IR method, but it also creates more noise. Opening the aperture definitely helps here since you will need lower aperture numbers (more wide open apertures) anyway in IR.



Mar 05, 2013 at 04:44 PM
dsjtecserv
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 60d + Infrared Filter


Some good advice in this thread, still active: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1193826

Dave



Mar 05, 2013 at 04:56 PM
arthurb
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 60d + Infrared Filter


If you use any lenses with a slot for rear mounted gelatine filters you can buy a gel IR filter from Lee or similar and just cut a square to fit.


Mar 05, 2013 at 05:08 PM
ange
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 60d + Infrared Filter


I agree with what the others have said. That 77mm filter size is pretty expensive without some assurance of decent results. Maybe an internet search for results from your camera with the filter will help you decide.

From my experience with Canon, the un-modded DSLR's require some really long exposure times to get anything at all. With my 350D for instance, I had to shoot 7 seconds to get much of anything at all at f/1.8 (50mm) at high ISO. Sure was a lot of bad noise. That exposure time was unacceptable to me.

Andy



Mar 05, 2013 at 05:36 PM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 60d + Infrared Filter


ange wrote:
From my experience with Canon, the un-modded DSLR's require some really long exposure times to get anything at all. With my 350D for instance, I had to shoot 7 seconds to get much of anything at all at f/1.8 (50mm) at high ISO. Sure was a lot of bad noise. That exposure time was unacceptable to me.

Andy


I used my 350D also for IR with the Hoya 72R filter method for several years before I decided to convert a second 5D MkII body. I also often took exposures between 5-20 sec depending on the light conditions. I never went above ISO 400 with the 350D. But the results were good as long as static subjects were used. Critical part with the IR filter method is to refocus correctly manually on the lens to adjust for the focus difference in IR.



Mar 05, 2013 at 05:55 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



ange
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 60d + Infrared Filter


retrofocus wrote:
I used my 350D also for IR with the Hoya 72R filter method for several years before I decided to convert a second 5D MkII body. I also often took exposures between 5-20 sec depending on the light conditions. I never went above ISO 400 with the 350D. But the results were good as long as static subjects were used. Critical part with the IR filter method is to refocus correctly manually on the lens to adjust for the focus difference in IR.


Yes, static subject was a must and it frustrated me. I also had trouble focusing. That's not bad to be able to use ISO 400 though. What lens were you using?

Andy



Mar 05, 2013 at 06:52 PM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 60d + Infrared Filter


ange wrote:
Yes, static subject was a must and it frustrated me. I also had trouble focusing. That's not bad to be able to use ISO 400 though. What lens were you using?

Andy


I was using several lenses, but most often my 17-40/4 L lens. Most often took shots with f/5.6 or f/11. Other lenses I used were 24-70/2.8 L and 24/3.5 T/S L vers. I.



Mar 05, 2013 at 07:24 PM
andbott723
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 60d + Infrared Filter


The remote test worked perfectly.
There was a nice purple light emitted from the remote.

Now Im still pretty new to this..
So which filter should i go about buying if i want color. Like those puprle hues/ red kinda stuff.

Do I want an 870nm or higher/lower?



Mar 06, 2013 at 12:26 AM
mpmendenhall
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 60d + Infrared Filter


andbott723 wrote:
The remote test worked perfectly.
There was a nice purple light emitted from the remote.

Now Im still pretty new to this..
So which filter should i go about buying if i want color. Like those puprle hues/ red kinda stuff.

Do I want an 870nm or higher/lower?


Lower (shorter wavelength). The longer the wavelength, the less difference there is between the different sensor colors (thus the less color variation you will see); at 870nm, the images will be nearly perfectly monochromatic straight out of camera. The Hoya R72 (720nm 50% point long-pass) is probably the best available option for color IR (the next readily available variety at 780nm is nearly monochromatic). You just don't want to go too low (e.g. B+W 092, 695nm cut), because then you'll be swamped by visible red light in the red channel.



Mar 06, 2013 at 12:33 AM
andbott723
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · 60d + Infrared Filter


mpmendenhall wrote:
Lower (shorter wavelength). The longer the wavelength, the less difference there is between the different sensor colors (thus the less color variation you will see); at 870nm, the images will be nearly perfectly monochromatic straight out of camera. The Hoya R72 (720nm 50% point long-pass) is probably the best available option for color IR (the next readily available variety at 780nm is nearly monochromatic). You just don't want to go too low (e.g. B+W 092, 695nm cut), because then you'll be swamped by visible red light in the red channel.


Sounds great!
Thanks.
Do you know of any cheaper filters in the 720nm than the hoya in 77mm?



Mar 06, 2013 at 12:39 AM
mpmendenhall
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · 60d + Infrared Filter


andbott723 wrote:
Do you know of any cheaper filters in the 720nm than the hoya in 77mm?


If you check eBay, there are *extremely* cheap Chinese-made IR filters of every variety --- I just ordered a "760nm" one (a variety not readily available from any known filter manufacturer), 77mm for under $15 shipped; I don't know if it will be any good. Heliopan makes a 715nm filter that should be similar to the Hoya, but probably even more expensive. The Hoya R72 is probably the cheapest option in that range from reputable manufacturers, but you could spin the roulette wheel on an ultra-cheap random Chinese one.



Mar 06, 2013 at 12:56 AM
burningheart
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 60d + Infrared Filter


mpmendenhall wrote:
Heliopan makes a 715nm filter that should be similar to the Hoya, but probably even more expensive.


Not cheap from the price list I got back in 2010 $206.05 from Adorama. They were the only ones who could get me Heliopan IR filters back then. All other stores said it wasn't in their catalog. Helen helped me get several of the Heliopan IR filters.

I noticed on BHPhoto now has it 6-8 weeks $238.99

Here is a low priced one too bad its back ordered

http://www.adorama.com/PD77IR726.html



Mar 06, 2013 at 01:31 AM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password