Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks, Henning, I think that Leica's admission that an IR filter may be needed at times confirms the sensors high sensitivity to IR. I certainly can't figure out why they require a coded lens with the filter though. As for UV, I was thinks about a Viso and bellows linked to a LTM enlarging lens on the M8. I already have the lenses and Viso stuff now is pretty cheap. Thats what I'm using on my D2X, bellows that is. I had to made an adapter to go from LTM to F though. If the M8 doesn't work for UV that's fine. My main concern is IR where M bodies really shine. Len On Nov 9, 2006, at 2:58 PM, Henning Wulff wrote: > At 10:50 PM -0500 11/8/06, Leonard Taupier wrote: >> Henning, >> >> The IR sensitivity you described with the one IR photo you shared >> appears to be much better then the D1H I purchased (very used) >> just for IR work. That high sensitivity is a big plus for me in >> considering the M8. I can easily filter out IR or UV but going the >> other way if the sensor doesn't have the sensitivity it's >> absolutely no good for IR sensitivity. IR photography with a RF >> camera like an M7 or M8 is a big plus since you can keep the >> filter on the lens at all time. >> >> I'm also shooting UV using an EL-Nikkor on a bellows and I find a >> very large difference in different sensor sensitivity to UV. A >> D200 has absolutely no sensitivity to UV (blank frames no matter >> the ISO setting and the time exposed) where a D2X has very good >> sensitivity. I use black light as a source, a B+W 403 filter and a >> Tiffen hot mirror. So I'm curious if the M8 has good near UV >> sensitivity down to about 350 nm as well. >> >> Len > > Len, > > Yes, the IR sensitivity is excellent, as demonstrated by the good > response with the 87 filter. Michael Reichmann on luminous- > landscape.com today has written some on the M8 IR sensitivity, and > said he had a hard time getting technically good photos, but I > don't know what lenses he was using. Just because a lens is good in > the visible spectrum does not mean it's useable in the IR region. > Also, he didn't feel the sensitivity was that good, but this time > of year the IR levels outside in northern climates does go down. He > got about the same exposures with the 87 filter that I got at the > end of August with the 89B. > > I really don't know about the UV sensitivity. I don't have any > lenses that I know transmit UV reasonably, and the Leica lenses > themselves have very good internal UV filtering, so that doesn't > work. I also don't have any UV pass filters. > > The only lens I could readily mount on the M8 that possibly has UV > transmissivity is a 120 Photar. But then, I had to give the M8 > back. :-( > > -- > * Henning J. Wulff > /|\ Wulff Photography & Design > /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com > |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information