[Leica] First IR photos with M8

[red735i at verizon.net (Frank Verizon)]

First of all. The lens is probably the place to start.  Take the same 
filter, same scene, but change the lens. What happens?  Different lenses 
have different spectral responses... Do you prefer the signature of one over 
another?  Some place I was reading about lenses that were tested for UV? Ir? 
and there was a set of lenses that were tested and found "better" for the 
purpose.  Note that they were not Leica, but rather lenses that would, for 
normal photography, be considered mundane or less. 

It might be valuable to you to review other IR shots from the WEB. while the 
ability to find the setup (lens, filter, sensor, time of year), there is 
some of that data available out there.

Scientific use of IR would never not accept unsharpness, if it were 
unacceptable in the resultant study. What do those people use?  

All of which is relevant if you want sharp IR  images. 
All of which is irrelevant if you like what you are getting now.

Or is it pure brain stimulation that you seek....?


Frank Filippone
Red735i at verizon.net

On Nov 16, 2015, at 10:06 PM, Howard Ritter <hlritter at bex.net> wrote:

One more way to evaluate the sharpness problem of course will be to repeat 
the photo with the same lens, shutter speed, and aperture but without the 
filter?see what happens with light that all comes to a focus in the same 
plane.

?howard


> On Nov 16, 2015, at 9:45 PM, Howard Ritter <hlritter at bex.net> wrote:
> 
> So the filter came from B&H today, a B+W 093 filter with a lower cutoff at 
> 830 nm. Wow, it?s really black! And I got the problem with modern SD cards 
> sorted and now the M8 is humming along with a 32GB card.
> 
> Late autumn does not present the best landscapes for IR, with a paucity of 
> green foliage, but here in NC there are still enough leaves on the trees 
> to allow for testing the gear. I stepped out of the house and found enough 
> to make for a good picture, with blue skies and some picturesque clouds.
> 
> Here are three: http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/For+Gallery/ 
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/For+Gallery/>
> 
> All were taken at ISO 640, hand held, with an Elmarit-M 24/2.8 lens wide 
> open and set with the infinity symbol at the f/5.6 mark. Exposures were in 
> the 1/20 range or longer. The files were stretched so the histograms 
> filled the entire range rather than the original ~60%, improving the 
> brightness and contrast. All were converted to greyscale.
> 
> At full screen, all three seem to lack the expected sharpness. I can think 
> of three possible reasons, the obvious ones being uncertainty about the 
> best focus point (I tried several focus marks, but I?ll have to experiment 
> further) and hand holding with a slow shutter. A third reason occurs to 
> me: The lens is achromatic across the visible part of the spectrum, but 
> obviously not for the part that extends into the IR, or there would be no 
> focus shift to compensate for. Can we assume that it IS achromatic across 
> the full range of IR wavelengths that the sensor is sensitive to? I don?t 
> think so. If it isn?t, and there?s enough energy in parts of the IR 
> spectrum that are far enough away from the notional focusing wavelength, 
> then there will be progressive blurring of images formed by wavelengths 
> further and further from the wavelength that is exactly focused.
> 
> In fact, this latter effect MUST be present with IR filters whose 
> passbands extend into the visible deep red: When the lens is focused on 
> the mark, the achromatic property of the lens puts the visible red in 
> focus, but not the dominant IR, or there?d be no need for focus 
> compensation. So there must be some degree of blurring with such filters; 
> why isn?t it an issue, visually speaking? That would be an argument for 
> using the smallest practicable aperture, while I was using the lens wide 
> open for shortest shutter speed. Also an argument for using ?tighter? 
> filters, with longer cutoff wavelengths, to limit the range of 
> wavelengths. Which however call for longer exposures or faster shutters. 
> But with ?looser" filters, the additional light that enables shorter 
> exposures is less in focus? Oy, my head hurts.
> 
> Tomorrow, experimenting with a range of apertures. On a tripod.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> ?howard
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information