If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
Mr.T wrote:
"Bob Milutinovic" wrote in message ... Should make for some interesting midsummer shooting of female subjects ;-) Hey, don't laugh; I know that's the first thing you all thought about! Expensive way to find out if a girl has had a "Brazilian" or not IMO :-) MrT. LOLOLOLOL agreed. I actually had other plans for my 350D convert. Cheers, Wayne -- Wayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 01:07:05 -0800, somehow managed
to impart: [snip] If you just use an IR-pass filter with the internal IR-blocking filter still in place, you'll see a light loss of anywhere from 6 to 15 EV depending on how strong the internal IR-blocking filter is. There are good exposure comparisons for a wide range of cameras at http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/index...mparisons.html Thanks for that link. I was particularly interested in the results with the Pentax *ist. Four of my best shots taken with my Pentax *ist DL with a Hoya R72 filter are he http://www.henniker.org.uk/html/arthurs_Seat.htm#IR. The link should take you to the 4 thumbnails at the bottom of a long page. These are all of Arthur's Seat, the extinct volcano in the centre of Edinburgh. Exposure for the first picture was f5.6 at 1/20th of a second at ISO400. There's more of The Meadows, a city centre Edinburgh park he http://www.henniker.org.uk/html/bruntMM_IR.htm. Because absolutely nothing is visible through the Pentax *ist Dl's viewfinder with the R72 filter attached to the lens, I used a tripod and composed the shot without the filter, before attaching it and using cable release on automatic exposure in Program mode. I probably told the camera to bracket exposures over and under by a full stop. The red images were converted to grey scale before using the auto-contrast and unsharp mask filters. The exif info is still embedded in the .jpg files. Gonna try raw format next time I do infrared... BTW, I didn't say our volcano hadn't been eroded by time and geology! ;o) The IR pictures are 1280 pixels wide and can be saved with a right-click, free for non-commercial private use only. Dave. http://www.henniker.org.uk 3000 photos especially Edinburgh & Scotland. + 3D rendered art, old ads etc. Délété david for email; watch the spam filters. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
Nice images.
Cheers, Wayne -- Wayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message ... I received my 350D back which was being converted to IR only shooting by LDP. My first shots with it are up at: http://experimentaldigitalphotography.com/2006/11/27/first-light-with-my-350d-converted-to-ir-only/ or http://tinyurl.com/yec2sf Interesting images (I am curious why you chose such wide stops with high shutter speeds, though...). BTW, Sony removed a valuable feature from their later Mini-DV cameras that offered "night shot" in the priggish belief that people could use it as an "X-Ray" feature to see through clothes. As a result, we can no longer shoot the beautiful daylight IR in video that had been possible (see http://www.ferrario.com/ruether/ir.htm for some sample frame-grabs from the early Sony TRV-9). With many camcorders the IR blocking filter can still be switched out for IR "night vision" (using IR light sources), but current Sony camcorders unfortunately force overexposure in daylight. -- David Ruether http://www.ferrario.com/ruether |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message ... I received my 350D back which was being converted to IR only shooting by LDP. My first shots with it are up at: http://experimentaldigitalphotography.com/2006/11/27/first-light-with-my-350d-converted-to-ir-only/ or http://tinyurl.com/yec2sf Interesting images (I am curious why you chose such wide stops with high shutter speeds, though...). BTW, Sony removed a valuable feature from their later Mini-DV cameras that offered "night shot" in the priggish belief that people could use it as an "X-Ray" feature to see through clothes. As a result, we can no longer shoot the beautiful daylight IR in video that had been possible (see http://www.ferrario.com/ruether/ir.htm for some sample frame-grabs from the early Sony TRV-9). With many camcorders the IR blocking filter can still be switched out for IR "night vision" (using IR light sources), but current Sony camcorders unfortunately force overexposure in daylight. -- David Ruether http://www.ferrario.com/ruether |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
Wayne J. Cosshall wrote: Mine was done by LDP (www.maxmax.com) The 350D conversion is US$450 + return shipping. Turn around time is very fast. For those interested another company that does this is LifePixel. http://www.lifepixel.com/ I've been seriously considering having my Totally Digital D60 converted. I guess it would be the Totally Digital Infrared D60 then. Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, does it? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:50:13 GMT, "David Ruether"
wrote: "Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message ... I received my 350D back which was being converted to IR only shooting by LDP. My first shots with it are up at: http://experimentaldigitalphotography.com/2006/11/27/first-light-with-my-350d-converted-to-ir-only/ or http://tinyurl.com/yec2sf Interesting images (I am curious why you chose such wide stops with high shutter speeds, though...). BTW, Sony removed a valuable feature from their later Mini-DV cameras that offered "night shot" in the priggish belief that people could use it as an "X-Ray" feature to see through clothes. Not that people "could", but "did". Then they posted images & videos on the internet. As a result, we can no longer shoot the beautiful daylight IR in video that had been possible (see http://www.ferrario.com/ruether/ir.htm for some sample frame-grabs from the early Sony TRV-9). With many camcorders the IR blocking filter can still be switched out for IR "night vision" (using IR light sources), but current Sony camcorders unfortunately force overexposure in daylight. -- Bill Funk replace "g" with "a" |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
David Ruether wrote:
Interesting images (I am curious why you chose such wide stops with high shutter speeds, though...). I used a wide aperture on those images because the info sheet that came back with the camera suggested a wider aperture would produce the sharpest result because of diffraction effects as the aperture got smaller. To test this I went out and shot with a Canon 50mm f1.8 and a Canon 100mm f2.8 macro at the full range of apertures to determine with apertures gave the sharpest results: http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=790 Cheers, Wayne -- Wayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote: David Ruether wrote: Interesting images (I am curious why you chose such wide stops with high shutter speeds, though...). I used a wide aperture on those images because the info sheet that came back with the camera suggested a wider aperture would produce the sharpest result because of diffraction effects as the aperture got smaller. Maybe. IR wavelengths are longer, and diffraction might bite you sooner (as you stop down). To test this I went out and shot with a Canon 50mm f1.8 and a Canon 100mm f2.8 macro at the full range of apertures to determine with apertures gave the sharpest results: http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=790 Good test. Thanks for putting it up. Both f/5.6 and f/8 look pretty good to me for both lenses. Even f/11 seems usable. Are you using the IR focusing marks on your lenses? Interestingly, most of the lenses here do have IR focusing marks. (All of the 17-40, 24TSE, 50/1.4 and 100/2.0 have an IR focusing indicator.) David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
David J. Littleboy wrote:
Are you using the IR focusing marks on your lenses? Interestingly, most of the lenses here do have IR focusing marks. (All of the 17-40, 24TSE, 50/1.4 and 100/2.0 have an IR focusing indicator.) David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan Hi David, No, I use autofocus, which the 350D does quite happily. Cheers, Wayne -- Wayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
First images with my infrared converted 350D | Wayne J. Cosshall | Digital Photography | 57 | January 20th 07 05:05 PM |
More test results of Canon 350D for Infrared photography | wayne | Digital Photography | 0 | February 14th 06 07:28 AM |
More test results of Canon 350D for Infrared photography | wayne | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | February 14th 06 07:26 AM |
Infrared tests of Canon 350D, Sony DSC-R1 and others | wayne | Digital SLR Cameras | 4 | February 9th 06 03:03 AM |
Infrared tests of Canon 350D, Sony DSC-R1 and others | wayne | Digital Photography | 0 | February 7th 06 04:07 AM |