1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Effects of 850nm and 950nm on E-P3?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by KBeezie, Sep 28, 2012.

  1. KBeezie

    KBeezie Mu-43 Top Veteran

    696
    Sep 15, 2012
    Grand Rapids, Mi
    Karl Blessing
    I've used an R72 (720nm) filter with my E-P3, but I would like to purchase either a 850 or 950 (in the 37mm thread so I Can just use it right on my 17/2.8), but even as I search this forum I can't seem to find any results on whether or not the sensor/filter in the E-P3 will be able to utilize either of the two filters even with long exposures.

    IF anyone knows that would be great.
     
  2. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Bob
    Curious about this myself. I haven't seen a lot of IR photos here on the site. There have been a few, but most with adapted cameras.
     
  3. f6cvalkyrie

    f6cvalkyrie Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 12, 2010
    Brussels, Belgium
    I'm shooting IR quite often, with my modified G1
    To shoot anything correctly, one need a MODIFIED camera, where the AA filter and the IRBlock filter have been removed. This must be done by someone who is knowledgable !

    It does not help much to put an IR filter in front of a non-modified camera ... you will have extremely long exposure times ..

    C U
    Rafael

    Lots of IR pictures in this album on photobucket :

    [ame="http://s643.photobucket.com/albums/uu153/f6cvalkyrie/Infrared%20pictures/"]Infrared pictures pictures by f6cvalkyrie - Photobucket[/ame]
     
  4. KBeezie

    KBeezie Mu-43 Top Veteran

    696
    Sep 15, 2012
    Grand Rapids, Mi
    Karl Blessing

    sometimes that's the desired effect.
     
  5. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Its more than that.... Strong on-sensor IR cut filter (camera depending) with a strong IR filter in front, you'll essentially approach recording a black frame even with long exposures.

    I don't shoot IR with micro 43 but with another system. Two cameras of 1 generation apart. The older one had an unusually weak IR cut filter which produces nice IR (but still limited). The other newer one with the updated "IR cut filter" is practically useless..... essentially a black frame with some splotches of red splotches where the brightest sunlight fell.

    I noticed your samples with the 720nm filter.. exposures are already at 13 seconds. The sensor is already showing signs of being "starved" for a signal (light). There's also some loss of detail and seems to be a very narrow dynamic range (did you push brightness and contrast in post?) Can't tell if it was shot in bright daylight... if so, you are already pushing what is capable without a modification to remove the IR cut filter.


    With mine, I tested out various filters borrowed from a local shop. In the end, I actually went with a IR filter that filtered out 650nm and below... allowing the IR sensitive but yet unmodified sensor more signal to work with. It was my feeling that filtering more would simply be diminishing the final quality of the image requiring the need to remove the on sensor IR cut filter which I didn't want to do at this time.
     
  6. edmsnap

    edmsnap Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Dec 20, 2011
    Edmonton, Alberta
    FWIW, I went out shooting this summer with an 850 filter on a 50mm f/1.4 lens and the E-M5 metered on average at 1/30th of a second. I was able to shoot handheld without an issue.
     
  7. f6cvalkyrie

    f6cvalkyrie Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 12, 2010
    Brussels, Belgium
    In that case ...
    or you could use ND filters and still maintain some color

    C U
    Rafael
     
  8. KBeezie

    KBeezie Mu-43 Top Veteran

    696
    Sep 15, 2012
    Grand Rapids, Mi
    Karl Blessing
    13 seconds at around f/8 or f/11, full bright on noon daylight. can get it down to about 1 second or half a sec at f/1.4