If I upgrade my backup to (hopefully) a d400 then my d80 might be going the way of IR. It seems as though converting the camera gives a different and in my head better look. Do any of you have experiences having this done to your cameras. What kind of prices should I expect. I have seen prices from a couple hundred to almost a thousand dollars for this conversion.
~Cheers
IR Conversion (Buying An IR Converted Camera)
(18 posts) (7 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
Aetas please use the forum, ah just kidding! I have a dedicated IR camera that I enjoy shooting with very much. You can convert the camera yourself but it's best to just have it done. Last time I checked the conversions kits weren't that expensive. Have you looked at LifePixel? They are pretty well known.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The IR cutoff on my D80 blocked an external filter and created odd and unusable results. In another recent thread we have been talking about the issues newer IR cut off in-camera filters really nullify IR photography with external filters.
I bought a D50 converted to IR on ebay and I think a converted camera is the only way to go. Most services run from $350-550 on DSLRs. Life Pixel seems to be the better of the companies in the US.
I have a 850nm cutoff on it which is really deep and is only good for B&W only.
For color swapping you need a less deep filter (720nm, 650nm)Personally unless you only (and I mean only) want to do B&W the 720nm filter seems to be a better choice over the 800nm+ filters since it gives more creative opportunities.
Posted 2 years ago # -
@NikoDoby - What filter do you have on your camera?
Posted 2 years ago # -
I have a 720 filter.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Thanks for the suggestion. To be real honest I will be shooting b&w only. I really like the "look" Its going to just be for some interesting side work so black and white is perfect. 850nm is what you have tao? I did a forum search on your flickr account=) and did not see any ir. I will have to do a little research on the 850. Might be a good fit for what I am going to be doing.
`ThanksPosted 2 years ago # -
I would strongly be cautious on the 850 and would choose a 720 next time even though 99% are B&W. The huge thing I have noticed is that I loose additional color gradation that would make the images better. Just like converting color to B&W, you would gain more options when converting it.
Actually all of the B&W one's on my first page are with the IR converted D50
Posted 2 years ago # -
I thought they were but did not know. You have some good work on there to. The 720 is what you would go with next time if you were to do it again? I see that life pixel lowered their prices to $250 for a full d80 conversion.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Defiantly the 720. As it stands the 850nm is only B&W and gets banding in color graduations since there is less color depth of the 850.
That is good to see they dropped their prices. I may have to look at updating my IR camera!
Posted 2 years ago # -
There is a third option I have seen on the Internet, that some photographers do not run a full conversion on their camera, but just take the of the IR High-pass-Filter that prevents the sensor to receive IR radiation, allowing in this way also regular photography and also IR photography.. In PBase I saw once examples of photos from a D70s without it's IR sensor filter and the results were astonishing.
Edit: Now I remember where I have read this: for Astro-Photography
There are also problems when removing the IR cutoff filter: Focus may be fooled on the long end (infinite) due that IR radiation is also received.Posted 2 years ago # -
rbid said:
There are also problems when removing the IR cutoff filter: Focus may be fooled on the long end (infinite) due that IR radiation is also received.Yea, I'd head this.
What seems the most versatile solution, but not the most convenient, would be to simply remove the high-pass from the camera. (as you said rbid)
What one'd ideally want to do is use an on-lens high-pass when shooting "normal" and an on-lens low-pass when shooting IR. Do on-lens high-pass filters exist?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Testing123 said:
What one'd ideally want to do is use an on-lens high-pass when shooting "normal" and an on-lens low-pass when shooting IR. Do on-lens high-pass filters exist?Yes but is costly. One can also do a UV filter similar to IR and get a whole new set of different images. (Personally I don't like either the full spectrum or UV)
The idea of adding a filter to your lens becomes costly if you want to use more than one lens and with different filter threads.
The key to having it done at the sensor level by a company like Life Pixel is that you get AF (mostly Needs to be bright - I use a MF lens all the time anyway) and they also set the focus for you on a lens of your choice.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Hello out there....
Can someone explain to me exactly what is done to the camera to make it "IR"? I have a D90...can this be "converted" and is it something one sends it in and spends lots for, or is it actually something one can do for oneself? Kinda like repairing an 18-105mm lens that broke off the camera, ha,ha,ha,....Just thought, as this was discussed at a meeting last night of camera folks, I would get some response on NRF.
Thanks, all.....
Posted 1 year ago # -
The conversion process basically consists of taking out the IR filter that's already installed in the camera by the manufacturer. Most camera sensors already have the capability to record (some) IR wavelengths so the camera manufacturer usually installs a filter to block the IR lights.
There are tutorials on how to perform conversions but I believe there are also people who offer IR conversion services. I've been wanting to convert my Canon XSi into an IR camera for a while now but just haven't gotten around to it.
If you want to convert to IR and have a Canon, search for "Gary Honis astrophotography." He has a step-by-step tutorial on converting Canon cameras to IR as well as the option of sending in your camera to him to covert it.
Sorry but I don't know of any websites on Nikon IR conversions...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Sensors are actually sensitive to more light wavelengths then the human eye. Like Iris said, all camera's have a IR cut off filter in front of the sensors. For a full conversion, the IR blocking filter is removed and a filter that only allows IR spectrum though is placed in front of the sensor and blocking out most or all of the visible light spectrum. That's it.
Any color work you see that is not just red and white, are Photoshop-ed using swapping WB color and other hue swaps. One thing to note is that IR and UV wavelengths are not good for normal photography and can create or add to CAs, haze, edge glow and even a loss of some potential sharpness. Some cameras are better than others for IR conversion due to sensor design and how it deals with IR & UV.
From horror stories I have read of people trying to do it themselves, I think I would leave it to people who do it every day. They really do take apart the camera and there are ribbons and pressure points that can break easily.
Here are some companies I follow: (just add ".com" to them.)
lifepixel
maxmax
digitalsilverimagingSite showing some editing info:
http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/1111417Posted 1 year ago # -
@iris chrome
@TaoTeJaredThank you both.... if NIKON ever gives us a D400, I think I might have the D90 converted. I shot some IR of models in the 1960's which is quite dramatic.. so... we will see. But I thank yo for explaining this to me. As I remember we used IR film with a red filter in the old days.
Posted 1 year ago # -
You might check on the flickr threads. I think the D90 may not have been a good IR converted camera due to the sensor - my memory may be failing me on that though. If that is all you have, then that is what you have.
The cameras I know that were/are good: D70s, D50, D200, D300, D2 (all series) and many canons are good at it. Canon sensors seem to really do IR well.You may want to look into ebay or some of the above sites for buying one outright. You know it works and you don't have to fear the "what happens if they break it" anticipation.
In retrospect/future I think I'm going to get my Canon G11 converted as many times I end up leaving my D50 home due to space/weight. Just my prerogative - at this moment.
Here is one I was working on this morning after installing LR4.
D50 - 28mm (24-120 f3.5-5.6 VR)- F5.6 - 1/180sec
Posted 1 year ago # -
Rats, just sold the D200 body.....
I might play in LR4 with some images and see what special effects I can get from just taking individual wavelengths and altering... Very interesting stuff and one never really knows how things will look until the image is seen. Nice thing about digital...
Might check on eBay.... thanks.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
