Ghost images with 486 IR filter

[rvaubel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Rex--

You are right, filters are the work of the Devil. But you're also right, the M8 needs them.

 

Check Sean's article on the subject: Per Schneider, the IR-cut coatings are more sensitive to abrasion than the MRC side. (You might also be interested in the claims they make for the MRC on their website, by the way--quite interesting.)

 

Anyway, since the AR side will take better to cleaning, it should be outermost.

 

(See, Mr Reid, I *did* read it and *can* articulate it even if I do blow it from time to time. )

 

--HC

 

Heliopan claims their IR cut filters are AR coated AND anti-scratch coated on BOTH sides. Schneider claims that is impossible

(according to Sean's article). Of course the main then not to lose sight of, is how well does the filter eliminate the IR contamination. I am awaiting Seans review

 

They also claim that their coating will repel water. Well I have the Heliopan filter, and mine doesn't repel water. The whole filter thing is so confusing as to coatings and claims that I have given up. I just hope Leica has more fortitude than I do.

 

Rex

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ho_co]

Pascal--

I think your 'with filter' and 'without filter' images are a pretty good indication that the filter is the culprit in this case, and I think any plane glass in front of the lens would have done the same.

 

But others here make good points: First, that's an amazing shot with the Zenitar; if the neon weren't so horridly overexposed, the reflexion wouldn't likely be visible at all. It's an excellent example of the fact that different lenses will exhibit different internal reflections.

 

And second, we do now have a sensor to worry about in terms of reflections. And that presents two aspects: First, it is much more reflective than film, and second, it is always flat and film seldom is, so the sensor's reflections may be more of a problem.

 

As we work with our M lenses plus filters we will definitely find more reflections than we did without filters. And as we start using a more reflective image plane, we will likely also find internal reflections that we wouldn't have had with film.

 

Very good, informative points throughout this thread.

 

Looks to me as if the filter issue goes right back to what we've always known, viz that filters can cause image degredation and should be used only when their benefit outweighs their drawbacks; and in that, digital's instant review will make recovery possible in many cases.

 

--HC

[ho_co]

The whole filter thing is so confusing as to coatings and claims that I have given up. I just hope Leica has more fortitude than I do.

Rex--

I agree. "Mine repels water and yours doesn't."--"Mine is scratch-resistant and yours isn't."--"Is too."--"Is not."

 

My feeling is that Leica is actually interested in making the best equipment that the public will buy, and that the employees are centered in that direction. From there I get to the belief that Leica and Kodak know the KAF-10500, and Leica will choose the best IR-Cut filters available (though I know "best" can be defined several ways). So I'll be glad to see the Leica filters arrive on the scene and won't second-guess them until someone forces my hand.

 

But one thing this thread shows is that for shots that don't need the IR-cut filter, it will be best to remove it from the lens. Like you, I grew up using filters only to protect the lens in the case of salt spray or rain or sand; for all normal situations, a filter can only create problems.

 

I think the new rule will be the opposite: Use the IR-cut filter at all times except for shots with light sources in the picture.

 

OT for the pros who are worried about the magenta cast: If it offends, just have the model tak it off!

 

--HC

[MarkM6]

You got that right. The $10,000 Canon lenses we use in TV news have to have the filters removed for shooting rainey and snow covered weather shots at night. We get a ghosting image of every headlight on every car.

 

I don't even know if I am agreeing with you or not. I am on my 3rd glass of Stags Leap merlot.... but the following was taken with the 5D (80-200 with damn filter I forgot to remove!);

 

[sean_reid]

Rex--

You are right, filters are the work of the Devil. But you're also right, the M8 needs them.

 

Check Sean's article on the subject: Per Schneider, the IR-cut coatings are more sensitive to abrasion than the MRC side. (You might also be interested in the claims they make for the MRC on their website, by the way--quite interesting.)

 

Anyway, since the AR side will take better to cleaning, it should be outermost.

 

(See, Mr Reid, I *did* read it and *can* articulate it even if I do blow it from time to time. )

 

--HC

 

Hi Howard,

 

Yes, and that's the key point with respect to orientation. As you know, that section of my article was based on an interview with one of the engineers who designed the 486 filter. The orientation mostly has to do with keeping the IR side better protected, as you say. As my source explained in the article, the filter works in either orientation.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

Unfortunately, it doesn't really make that much difference which way the AR coating is facing.

 

Rex

 

Yes, you'll see that discussed in the article when you finally get around to reading it <G>

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Heliopan claims their IR cut filters are AR coated AND anti-scratch coated on BOTH sides. Schneider claims that is impossible

(according to Sean's article).

 

Rex

 

Hi Rex,

 

So you have read it now...but you misunderstood. Schneider's point was that they couldn't put the AR coating over the IR coating without making the latter less effective (or ineffective). Again, this is from one of the engineers who designed the filter. I think I recall that you work in a related industry.

 

Long story short....even the best MC filters money can buy will sometimes cause reflections, flare, etc. if they encounter exactly the wrong conditions. It doesn't matter what kind of filter it is, they all can do it if sufficiently provoked by light. The condition that can cause problems with almost any filter is one where there are very bright lights against a dark background. We know this from film photography as well. Good MC helps a lot but it reduces, not eliminates, the problem.

 

My suggestion is that if one is shooting in conditions that cause havoc with filters, shoot the M8 with no filter and use Jamie's profile, if needed, to address color.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

Rex--

I think the new rule will be the opposite: Use the IR-cut filter at all times except for shots with light sources in the picture.

--HC

 

I think so too provided that one is working in color. That's essentially the idea I tried to put forward in that section of the article. B&W photographers don't need to mess with this stuff.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[rvaubel]

Sean

 

I was surprised to see that almost 80% of Leica users had an issue with unnecesary protective filter use. It seems that Leica users want there optics to go "go bare" and are unusually sensitive to letting anything come between them. Considering the high cost of Leica glass, it is a little surprising that the protective factor takes the back seat. But on the other hand, those in pursuit of the ultimate resolution and that ephemeral Leica look, may object to any superfilous elements in the optical path. At least thats the way I always looked at it

 

But I don't want to blow up the filter thing out of proportions. I never had a problem using a filter for a good reason. The M8 requires an IR filter in most cases. I can live with that. Someday, over the rainbow, their will be an M9 that doesn't require IR filters. But I'm not going to drag my DSLR kit around with me until they do.

 

Leica has done a hell of a job solving (almost) a devilishly tricky problem. The filter compromise is something I am willing to accept as an interim solution. Of course, for Leica, that would be about 5 years

 

Rex

[harmsr]

I just got back from the SHOT show in Orlando and also a personal visit to Disney Pleasure Island.

 

Both the B+W 486 and Heliopan filters had reflections from some of the lighting at night. They both performed identically in respect to completely solving the magenta issues. The reflections only came from spot lighting which was very intense compared to the other very subdued lighting and when pointed directly at the lens.

 

After removing the filter (following "chimping" and seeing the reflection), I got no reflection with the same composition and exposure setting.

 

On the non filter shots, I used Jamie's profile and got good results except for a couple of true magentas turning black. However, the shot still looks great even though it is not exactly true. For this purpose it was ok.

 

Unfortunately, I doubt that Leica is going to be able to eliminate the reflection issue when a IR cut filter is used.

 

Ray

[ho_co]

the following was taken with the 5D (80-200 with damn filter I forgot to remove!);

Mark--

That's a beautiful shot, wonderful contrasting colors. Even the filter reflections aren't that bad, considering the effectiveness of the rest of the image.

 

But it's interesting again as in the "CINEMA" shot, the headlights show no detail but their reflections do. And it's especially interesting to me that the reflections show both horizontal and vertical lines--again, proof that even though filters are the work of the Devil, the dude can quote Scripture when it pleases him! ()

 

--HC

[steich]

Servus,

Leica just told me they are not going to offer an "anti-magenta"-filter for my good old Canada 2/90 Summicron with its E48 thread. Quote: "this one is discontinued since 1979, the new ones are far much better..." -- which means "throw away the lens you have although you like it, and buy new one QUICK".

I am not going to do so.

Has anybody here tested the B&W 486 filter with the 2/90 Canada ´cron yet?

Will it fit under the lens hood?

Are Schneider Kreuznach really the ones who make the filters for Leica?

As far as any of the "beta testers" know- are the B&W 486 filters the same as those labelled "Leica"?

 

Thanks

Stefan