I saw some pretty interesting infrared photos so I thought I would give it a try to have some fun. I just bought a used A7RII (will have it on Monday) for the sole purpose of converting it to a infrared camera by Life Pixel, before I found this on their website:
"Note: The Sony A7S II, A7R II, A7R III and A9 use an IR LED as part of their electronic shutter monitor. Once these models are converted to IR, the internal IR LED will contaminate all images shot at exposures greater than 1 second."
Looks like the A7RII is not a good candidate if shooting longer than 1 second could be problematic. I may get a cheaper body for conversion to try out. What I am afraid of is that I will try a couple dozens shots and will never touch it again. I know everyone has different interest, just wondering those who have converted infrared cameras, was it a fad for you or you use it a fair amount?
I find the conversions that result in Wild colours get boring very quickly. Well done black and white produce some dramatic images. Are you one that currently converts your images to B&W...if not then I would think it might be a fad for you.
I adore IR photography, not only for the look but for the ability to go out with my fam midday and still get some fun pics that would otherwise be ruined by the harsh light.
I prefer mono (and shoot with an 850nm converted body), but if done correctly you can do some killer false color work.
Have you considered buying an IR filter to see if you'd like it? That'd be a way cheaper alternative. You'll have some annoyances to deal with, but probably a better option than diving in with a conversion.
beavens wrote:
I adore IR photography, not only for the look but for the ability to go out with my fam midday and still get some fun pics that would otherwise be ruined by the harsh light.
I prefer mono (and shoot with an 850nm converted body), but if done correctly you can do some killer false color work.
Have you considered buying an IR filter to see if you'd like it? That'd be a way cheaper alternative. You'll have some annoyances to deal with, but probably a better option than diving in with a conversion.
Jeff
Jeff - where did you have the conversion done and how did you choose 850nm ove other wavelengths?
DaveFP wrote:
Jeff - where did you have the conversion done and how did you choose 850nm ove other wavelengths?
I had the conversion done by Kolari Vision. I settled on 850 after previously converting another body to 665 and finding myself almost always converting to mono. While 665 still did a pretty good job of converting, I figured if I'm gonna nearly always go B&W that I might as well get the best out of the box and go for 850. Plus I wanted a FF body to get the all out of the 16-35 I was using.
A fad? People have been converting digital bodies for the last 15 years I’ve been active on various forums, so there is still continued interest. Now, a niche? Absolutely. It’s one of those love it or hate it things, and I’ve personally never seen the appeal of the images created by IR bodies.
I’ve always been curious from a b/w perspective but I’m not sure you’d get a result with IR you couldn’t get with a straight b/w conversion from a normal cam.
beavens wrote:
I had the conversion done by Kolari Vision. I settled on 850 after previously converting another body to 665 and finding myself almost always converting to mono. While 665 still did a pretty good job of converting, I figured if I'm gonna nearly always go B&W that I might as well get the best out of the box and go for 850. Plus I wanted a FF body to get the all out of the 16-35 I was using.
Jeff
Thanks - and why that wavelength over the other B&Ws?
IR is not a fad for me. It is a bit more serious than that.
Since I do the conversions on my own ever since a Nikon D70, it is a bit easier as far as hardware is concerned.
If you are getting it converted by a service provider, consider an A7R or an A7III.
A “full spectrum” conversion lets you use it with a filter of your choice.
A specific IR conversion, with a 550nm or 600nm (low number) allows you to capture the “wild colors” . In addition if you add a filter like an 800nm or 950nm (higher number) on the lens, you can have a monochrome rendition (ie, IR captures devoid of of the “wild colors”)
You can opt for a drop in filter or a filter on the lens (requires various filters depending on the lenses you would use).
p.1 #10 · Is Infrared Photography a Fad (for you)?
DaveFP wrote:
Thanks - and why that wavelength over the other B&Ws?
850 produces zero color and the deepest blacks. It just made the most sense since my in interest in false color is limited.
RoamingScott wrote:
I’ve always been curious from a b/w perspective but I’m not sure you’d get a result with IR you couldn’t get with a straight b/w conversion from a normal cam.
It really depends on the situation. Some shots are indiscernible from standard B&W, but in optimal (harsh) IR light I think there's a huge difference.
p.1 #12 · Is Infrared Photography a Fad (for you)?
chez wrote:
I find the conversions that result in Wild colours get boring very quickly. Well done black and white produce some dramatic images. Are you one that currently converts your images to B&W...if not then I would think it might be a fad for you.
Thanks, Chez. I am only interested in B&W infrared photos.
p.1 #13 · Is Infrared Photography a Fad (for you)?
Back in college days I worked in the college photo lab. We got some surplus inferred film in. We had no idea how to expose it or what developer it needed. But what the heck, it was surplus (free to me) so I loaded some in a 35mm cartridge and went out with my Exa II and a Flecktogon 35mm lens. I guessed about 100 ASA, took some shots, came back to the darkroom and used D76. It was all guesswork, but I still have a print from that afternoon on my wall.
About 5 or 6 years ago, before I switched to Sony, I decided to make use of a feature (flaw) of my Leica M8.2 - the lack of sufficient IR filter on that sensor. For normal photography, IR blocking filters were required to keep black from looking purple. So I bought a non-IR blocking filter for it and used it for IR photography. It was fun. Some of the old lenses (like my beloved 50mm Zeiss Sonnar f/1.5) have a red mark indicating the proper focus correction for IR. SO I would use normal range finder focus, then look at the lens and shift focus to the red line, then snap the photo. It worked like a charm.
I have not done IR work since starting to use Sony. So it was definitely a fad. But it was an enjoyable one.
p.1 #15 · Is Infrared Photography a Fad (for you)?
Bertrick wrote:
Back in college days I worked in the college photo lab. We got some surplus inferred film in. We had no idea how to expose it or what developer it needed. But what the heck, it was surplus (free to me) so I loaded some in a 35mm cartridge and went out with my Exa II and a Flecktogon 35mm lens. I guessed about 100 ASA, took some shots, came back to the darkroom and used D76. It was all guesswork, but I still have a print from that afternoon on my wall.
About 5 or 6 years ago, before I switched to Sony, I decided to make use of a feature (flaw) of my Leica M8.2 - the lack of sufficient IR filter on that sensor. For normal photography, IR blocking filters were required to keep black from looking purple. So I bought a non-IR blocking filter for it and used it for IR photography. It was fun. Some of the old lenses (like my beloved 50mm Zeiss Sonnar f/1.5) have a red mark indicating the proper focus correction for IR. SO I would use normal range finder focus, then look at the lens and shift focus to the red line, then snap the photo. It worked like a charm.
I have not done IR work since starting to use Sony. So it was definitely a fad. But it was an enjoyable one....Show more →
p.1 #16 · Is Infrared Photography a Fad (for you)?
I'm on my third IR conversion now, first one was a very low spec APS-C EOS which was mediocre, second was a Fuji X system which was OK.
Latest one was my original A7r, which I had plan to sell/trade but it had cleaning marks on the sensor. IR (or full spectrum in my case) removes the hot mirror anyways to it fixed 2 birds with one stone.
Now I have an IR camera with a complement of lenses I love it.
IR can be great especially around the middle of the day when the light is harsh and unflattering for normal photography so it can extend your shooting opportunities.
p.1 #18 · Is Infrared Photography a Fad (for you)?
I have to say that after having 3 different IR conversion, the biggest challenge is post processing.
You're likely gonna start with a pretty flat looking file and depending on filters, it may even look red (correctable of course).
Building a good workflow and having the confidence to totally mess with white balance beyond normal settings is a must
