UV IR filter as protection on M9?

[XVarior]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you all for your feedback and even pictures. I think I'll take it off and use the lens without a filter.

the first day I shot with the lens, I had no strange effects, but later that day, I took a couple of shots of my friend inside a coffee shop, I was surprised to see the purple skin tones!

took many other portraits outside that afee later, at dusk hours and later, skin tones came out superb. so I don't know if the shift here was a WB camera error or cause by the filter.

PS: shirt, sofa and walls colors are accurate, only the skin tones are off!!!

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest volker_m]

Both images could be corrected with LCC, no?

LCC = Lens Cast correction

 

Sure. That would be the "manual" postprocessing step that I mentioned above (#14).

[erl]

The "green corners" side effect of UV/IR is pretty obvious with the camera. The wider the lens, the more obvious it is.

 

Examples below are with M9 and Summilux21, shot against a white wall. First picture without filter, second picture with Leica UV/IR filter added.

Unlike the M8, the M9 does not automatically remove the color shift because it is not designed for UV/IR filter use.

Your contention is quite valid, if you are in the habit of shooting white walls, especially with a 21 mm or other W/A lens. However in the real world where one might more commonly use normal or tele lenses and shoot motifs, including those containing black synthetic fabrics, frequently lit by tungsten lights (wedding and theatrical photographers beware!), removing the IR cut filter would be worse.

 

The colour cast you illustrated is true, but would mostly be masked by the subject matter in many cases. The real issue for the photographer is to understand all these parameters and choose which will be the least intrusive to the final image.

 

One reasonably approach would be to fit IR cut filters to all lenses from say 35mm or longer, avoiding the wider lenses. Again, simple experimentation gives immediate feedback.

[jaapv]

Oh wow, Jip, your input is about the only positive one regarding this filter M9-IR combo. in case it would enhance the image, in which lighting situation could that be and in which situation you think it could go wrong?

thanks again for your input.

 

I have them on all my lenses except the 24 and 18 right now, but then I am under the African sun presently and would have real IR problems when the sun is high.

[Guest volker_m]

Your contention is quite valid, if you are in the habit of shooting white walls, especially with a 21 mm or other W/A lens.

 

Thanks. Irony from the forum moderators is much appreciated, now that I took the time to prepare example pictures that isolate the UV/IR edge effect from other influences. I thought it might be good to show what effect we're talking about, without all the unpredictable real world effects that might or might no hide this.

 

The real issue for the photographer is to understand all these parameters and choose which will be the least intrusive to the final image.

 

Very true. If you could now provide pictures to compare the IR contamination effect in fabrics for the M9, under the exact same conditions with/without UV/IR filter, that would be a good starting point so that readers can make an educated decision.

[mirekti]

This is M240: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/310048-m240-color-test-oh-oh.html#post2563122

This is M9 vs M240 comparison: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/310048-m240-color-test-oh-oh-3.html#post2564388 where Mz=M240, and Mx=M9.

[tobey bilek]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I rarely take them off as they are are used on both M8 and M9. Never had a problem.

 

I never use auto WB.

 

240 is another story.