5DIII and infrared

As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago. I
decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/

In article ,
rwalker wrote:

As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago. I
decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/

Looks sort of bland, but it looks to be a bit overcast, which would
explain it. Try it on a sunny day with a couple of clouds in the sky
only.


--
Sandman[.net]

On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 10:03:09 +0200, Sandman wrote:

In article ,
rwalker wrote:

As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago. I
decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/

Looks sort of bland, but it looks to be a bit overcast, which would
explain it. Try it on a sunny day with a couple of clouds in the sky
only.

Yes, it was very overcast, as it has been here for the last month. I
keep hoping for good sunlight, but at least I know it has pretty good
sensitivity to IR.

On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 03:56:53 -0400, rwalker wrote:
: As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago.

Missed seeing that. Congratulations! ;^)

: I decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
: R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
: 10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.
:
: http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/

Assuming you were using a decent lens, the picture doesn't look quite as sharp
as I might have expected. Does the 5D3 (or the lens) provide any assistance in
making the necessary IR focus correction, or did you have to wing it?

Bob

On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 10:02:15 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 03:56:53 -0400, rwalker wrote:
: As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago.

Missed seeing that. Congratulations! ;^)

: I decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
: R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
: 10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.
:
: http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/

Assuming you were using a decent lens, the picture doesn't look quite as sharp
as I might have expected. Does the 5D3 (or the lens) provide any assistance in
making the necessary IR focus correction, or did you have to wing it?

Bob

I was winging it. Also, I'm still awaiting delivery of the cable
release, so there's probably a little shake.

On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 10:02:15 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 03:56:53 -0400, rwalker wrote:
: As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago.

Missed seeing that. Congratulations! ;^)

: I decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
: R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
: 10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.
:
: http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/

Assuming you were using a decent lens, the picture doesn't look quite as sharp
as I might have expected. Does the 5D3 (or the lens) provide any assistance in
making the necessary IR focus correction, or did you have to wing it?

Bob


A couple more taken today, hand held at 1/10 second and ISO 4000, F4.
I need the cable release and tripod. Incidentally, the lens is the
25-104 Canon L lens.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51646689@N00/9286699267/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...n/photostream/

On 7/14/2013 3:56 AM, rwalker wrote:
As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago. I
decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/


Something is missing. Infrared is supposed to have quite a different
look. You must have done something in post.

http://peternewman.smugmug.com/Photography/Landscapes/21271534_mw4B9R#!i=1730614889&k=WGpJLmN&lb=1&s=A
--
PeterN

On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 23:24:22 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/14/2013 3:56 AM, rwalker wrote:
As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago. I
decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/


Something is missing. Infrared is supposed to have quite a different
look. You must have done something in post.

http://peternewman.smugmug.com/Photography/Landscapes/21271534_mw4B9R#!i=1730614889&k=WGpJLmN&lb=1&s=A

Very little. All I did was convert to gray scale, and do some noise
reduction. I used the same procedure I used to follow with my old
350D. That gave me what I consdered fairly normal looking IR photos,
compared to other examples I've looked at. Admittedly, the IR filter
I have now, which is an IR72, was a fairly cheap one (Bower). I don't
know if that makes a difference or not. The camera and lens about
blew my photography budget for the year, but maybe I need a higher
quality IR filter.

On 2013-07-14 20:24:22 -0700, PeterN said:

On 7/14/2013 3:56 AM, rwalker wrote:
As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago. I
decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/


Something is missing. Infrared is supposed to have quite a different
look. You must have done something in post.

http://peternewman.smugmug.com/Photography/Landscapes/21271534_mw4B9R#!i=1730614889&k=WGpJLmN&lb=1&s=A

I

suspect the OP just added the R72 filter and believed he was going to
get true digital IR captures.
The proper use of the R72 is in combination with IR film. You are not
going to get the greatest IR results with an unconverted DSLR.

I am still considering converting my D70 as it is getting little to no
general use these days.
http://www.lifepixel.com/

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 23:24:22 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/14/2013 3:56 AM, rwalker wrote:
As I mentioned elsewhere, I got a Canon 5DIII about two weeks ago. I
decided to see what kind of infrared sensitivity it had, so I got an
R72 filter and took a few shots. This was one of the better results.
10 seconds, F4, ISO 100.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...1330/lightbox/


Something is missing. Infrared is supposed to have quite a different
look. You must have done something in post.

http://peternewman.smugmug.com/Photography/Landscapes/21271534_mw4B9R#!i=1730614889&k=WGpJLmN&lb=1&s=A


Yes, I agree, I looked at your link and that's what I think IR should
look like.