Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/09

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] M8 magenta problems - Leica offer a solution
From: len-1 at comcast.net (Leonard Taupier)
Date: Thu Nov 9 13:21:46 2006
References: <EB069654-2966-40E2-A4EA-BDEE715E0179@steveunsworth.co.uk> <p0623090cc1784dced7a7@[10.1.16.129]> <5AF0BE85-F603-49C0-8A5A-35FB5F0A94AD@comcast.net> <p06230912c179371558ae@[10.1.16.129]>

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


In reply to: Message from lug at steveunsworth.co.uk (Steve Unsworth) ([Leica] M8 magenta problems - Leica offer a solution)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] M8 magenta problems - Leica offer a solution)
Message from len-1 at comcast.net (Leonard Taupier) ([Leica] M8 magenta problems - Leica offer a solution)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] M8 magenta problems - Leica offer a solution)