I haven't physically seen one yet, but my understanding from reading the Fujifilm USA press releases & website info and talking to some Fujifilm staff is the following:
--
Yes, since there is not IR & UV blocking filter over the sensor, the filter to block visible light are not making the S3 UVIR any slower, just allowing the user to choose between UV or IR.
There's some stuff in this thread which might be of use. I should skip the first long post from me:-
--My understanding was that (at least on the converted cameras) one
would just take the picture, having to adjust some for focus, but
am not aware that they are using and filters to take the shots...
I would have thought the same would hold true with this camera. Is
it because it's sensitive to both UV and IR that you would need to
place the filter? I thought people were just desaturating the
colors in post? I am a complete newbie to this so any help is
appreciated.
--
-Michael
Just take the picture =)
Equipment in profile
Growing Gallery at:
http://www.ballentphoto.com
--The new UVIRS3 has, it seems, a filter in front of the CCD that is
transmitting UV, visible and IR.
Some conversions use a filter that is just transmitting IR, hence,
no filter in front of the lens gives already good IR images.
See also: pink line is representing a filter that is often used in
so called IR conversion.
--My understanding was that (at least on the converted cameras) one
would just take the picture, having to adjust some for focus, but
am not aware that they are using and filters to take the shots...
I would have thought the same would hold true with this camera. Is
it because it's sensitive to both UV and IR that you would need to
place the filter? I thought people were just desaturating the
colors in post? I am a complete newbie to this so any help is
appreciated.
--
-Michael
Just take the picture =)
Equipment in profile
Growing Gallery at:
http://www.ballentphoto.com
Regards,
Beru
http://www.nikonians-images.com/galleries/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=83135
On a properly "IR-converted" DSLR where there's an IR-pass filter behind the shutter, the photographer's eye, the AF system, and the exposure meter are all seeing the unfiltered light, while the imaging sensor gets the IR-only light.
Digital cameras are sensitive to everything from UV to IR, including visible light. Typically you want just UV or IR or visible-light in a photo (although sometimes combinations can be useful, as long as "chromatic aberration" doesn't become an issue due to the different focussing behaviour of the wavelengths) and thus you use various filters to restrict the light making it through to the sensor. "Normal" cameras have a filter that passes only UV and IR, and this is the filter that's removed and replaced in camera conversions.I would have thought the same would hold true with this camera. Is
it because it's sensitive to both UV and IR that you would need to
place the filter? I thought people were just desaturating the
colors in post? I am a complete newbie to this so any help is
appreciated.
The Baader is about $100, but is only available in 1.25 inch at this time. This is not a problem, if you're going to fir it to an enlarger lens, but may be a problem for a standard macro or "simple" UV friendly prime like some of the ones that Bjorn recommends.
That's a great deal to ask of anyone
Sounds like a good starting point. I ended up along that path. I have a bellows (or three) so my primary UV lens is a Nikkor enlarging lens.
Bjorn has recently changed his favorite UV filter. He now uses a UG-11X. The UG11 glass passes about 30% more UV than the UG1 glass does, but it also passes a lot more "problem" IR. You can't "fix" it with a blue green KG3 or a hot mirror. Those barely work on the UG1.
I hope they do something a little different (although I've never seen it mentioned in instructions such as LifePixel's).
Very.
Interesting.As an aside, with a "compact" camera where the viewfinder,
focussing and metering comes from the main imaging sensor (which is
behind the filter) the entire system can be made automatic.
Digital cameras are sensitive to everything from UV to IR,I would have thought the same would hold true with this camera. Is
it because it's sensitive to both UV and IR that you would need to
place the filter? I thought people were just desaturating the
colors in post? I am a complete newbie to this so any help is
appreciated.
including visible light. Typically you want just UV or IR or
visible-light in a photo (although sometimes combinations can be
useful, as long as "chromatic aberration" doesn't become an issue
due to the different focussing behaviour of the wavelengths) and
thus you use various filters to restrict the light making it
through to the sensor. "Normal" cameras have a filter that passes
only UV and IR, and this is the filter that's removed and replaced
in camera conversions.
In "IR conversions" this filter is replaced with an IR-pass filter
(in my conversions I offer a choice of 3 types) while in
conversions like my "CLR" and the S3 Pro UVIR it is replaced with a
filter that passes light from UV through IR (using "plain glass"
isn't perfect as it typically doesn't pass much UV).
In bodgy "home conversions" this filter is sometimes simply
removed, but there are advantages of replacing it with SOMETHING,
not least of which is to protect the sensor underneath from dust
and scratches.
You may find it useful to read http://burren.cx/photo/ir_cameras.html
