mirekti Posted January 19, 2014 Share #1 Posted January 19, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I took some photos where I was able to see the IR impact on them so I decided to buy these filters for all my lenses. In the meantime it became so annoying to take care whether I have the filter on or not. I remove it in night shots, but often it stay through the day, and than I get something like this (see the reflection in the upper part of the photo). It annoys me so much that I might sell them, and simply bear the IR noise instead. What do you think, how many of you use them? Thanks. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/220490-do-you-use-uvir-cut-fitlers-with-m240/?do=findComment&comment=2513086'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 19, 2014 Posted January 19, 2014 Hi mirekti, Take a look here Do you use UV/IR cut fitlers with M240?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Leonil Posted January 19, 2014 Share #2 Posted January 19, 2014 I used my 50 summicron with a B+W clear filter, just as a habit as I prefer having a piece of glass Im not afraid of touching with a brush or cloth etc. Its an expensive B+W UV filter but its not as expensive as those leica cut filters. Ive pixel peeped and cant see differences (was borrowing a friends M) and most of all, IR in the M240 Ive seen is not really that much of an issue in 98% of the time. Ive also heard there are presets in lightroom that rid the IR effect in black fabrics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 19, 2014 Share #3 Posted January 19, 2014 Filters can indeed cause flare and ghost images but UV/IR's are not significantly worse than UV's many photogs are using as "protective" filters anyway. I've put UV/IR filters on all my lenses because i use them on both M8.2 and M240 bodies but i remove them for night shootings, to avoid cyan shift and when i shoot against the light from time to time. All in all, more than 90% satisfaction but i've learnt to identify flare situations. In case of doubt, an EVF may be useful if you don't mind using a TV set on your dear M body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted January 19, 2014 Author Share #4 Posted January 19, 2014 Initialy, I wasn't fond of any filters at all, and in case I didn't notice this IR thing, I wouldn't have used them at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 19, 2014 Share #5 Posted January 19, 2014 Same for me since the M8.2 but the M240 is much less prone to IR contamination. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted January 19, 2014 Share #6 Posted January 19, 2014 I only use the IR Cut filters indoors with a variety of artificial light to prevent color casts. Outdoors I see no difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 19, 2014 Share #7 Posted January 19, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) They are simply on the lens at all times. I have only very few problems with reflections, and when they happen I can remove the filter or deal with it in postprocessing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted January 19, 2014 Share #8 Posted January 19, 2014 No Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted January 19, 2014 Share #9 Posted January 19, 2014 I hate having filters in front of my lenses. I find that digital with its very reflective sensor surface, is far more prone to ghost images than film ever was. Colour film in particular, really needed a skylight or UV filter. I was delighted when I moved from the M8 to M9 to put the UV/IR filters in a drawer and the only time I have taken them out since, is when I am taking photographs at high altitudes, where there is a lot of UV around. I have enough UV filters left over from the days when I mostly took film, to cover most of my lenses. I have quite a few images taken with the M8, using UV/IR filters, where outdoors I have pink circles in the sky and indoors, ghost images of wall lights etc. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted January 19, 2014 Author Share #10 Posted January 19, 2014 Ah, I'd so toss them all away, than again, in certain situations they'd be useful. I guess I'll keep on fidling with screwing them on, and off. In case I do the first, any tips in PP (prefer LR) that would cure the IR contamination the best? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted January 19, 2014 Share #11 Posted January 19, 2014 Ah, I'd so toss them all away, than again, in certain situations they'd be useful. I guess I'll keep on fidling with screwing them on, and off. In case I do the first, any tips in PP (prefer LR) that would cure the IR contamination the best? If you are using a dual illuminance profile, one of the test colour swatch panels of which was taken in noon day bright sunlight, that will correct for a fair bit of IR contamination. I have to admit to not finding it a problem anyway with the M240. It is nothing like as bad as the M8 without filters, where every dark synthetic material came out magenta. I wonder if it is worse for camera produced JPEG’s, which I very rarely use. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted January 20, 2014 Author Share #12 Posted January 20, 2014 Maybe I should take it as something positive and while I already fiddle with the filters get myself one IR too. Something like this B+W 49mm 093 (87C) Infrared Glass Filter 65-072466 B&H Photo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted January 20, 2014 Share #13 Posted January 20, 2014 I don’t think the M240 is sufficiently sensitive to IR, to use it to take IR photos. Unlike the M8 and the main reason I have kept mine, which can take wonderful IR photos. I have a whole range of different B+W, Tiffen and Kodak Wratten filters to play with. I think if you wanted to use the M240, you would probably need to have the cover glass/high pass filter removed from the front of the sensor. I don’t know if that is possible. It certainly is with various Canon DSLR’s as that is now the mainstay income generator for my local camera repairer, Protech. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 20, 2014 Share #14 Posted January 20, 2014 It works fine with a 093 filter, albeit at something like ISO 2500. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted January 20, 2014 Share #15 Posted January 20, 2014 It works fine with a 093 filter, albeit at something like ISO 2500. I have to admit to being surprised that it is even that sensitive. The M8 of course can be used down at 320 or 640 hand held ISO with the 092 or 093. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 20, 2014 Share #16 Posted January 20, 2014 It does hardly anything with an 092 filter, so there is a cutoff. It obviously needs the deep red that a 093 filter transmits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted January 20, 2014 Share #17 Posted January 20, 2014 It does hardly anything with an 092 filter, so there is a cutoff. It obviously needs the deep red that a 093 filter transmits. I think the only 093 I have is 58mm, whereas I use 52mm IR pass filters for all my Leica lenses with various step up rings. I may have a Kodak Wratten or Tiffin filter equivalent to the 093 but the codes are a bit obscure. Somewhere I have a de-coding chart for Wratten. I think the numbers were awarded sequentially as to when the filter came out but then the letters refer to the intensity. Wilson PS I think a Wratten 87C or 88A is equivalent to an 093 and I only have an 87A in 52mm, which is similar to an 092. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 20, 2014 Share #18 Posted January 20, 2014 Embarrased - I switched 092 and 093 here. 092 is the more deep red red filter, the 093 is full IR. This is a relevant thread: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/312598-leica-m-ir-photography.html There is a post there that shows it will even do full IR, albeit at 8 sec shutterspeed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted January 20, 2014 Share #19 Posted January 20, 2014 Embarrased - I switched 092 and 093 here. 092 is the more deep red red filter, the 093 is full IR.This is a relevant thread: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/312598-leica-m-ir-photography.html There is a post there that shows it will even do full IR, albeit at 8 sec shutterspeed. Oh well in that case, I am pretty sure I have an 092, I will give it a go. If it works, I may sell my M8. I don’t really need an M4, M8, 9 and 240. I sold my M6 (and all my Contax equipment) when I got the M8, as I did not need two film M’s. I do need two digital M’s. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 20, 2014 Share #20 Posted January 20, 2014 Just try before you sell; the M8 is worth more as a camera than you will get in money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.