jaapv Posted February 23, 2015 Share #381 Posted February 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Good point. This quiz should be done with IR filters on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 Hi jaapv, Take a look here 400 Leica photographers agree: we love CCD!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
elmars Posted February 23, 2015 Share #382 Posted February 23, 2015 In the uncorrected/uncropped images: 1) was lens detection turned on, or the lens type set manually? The M240 image shows more vignetting than the M9. 2) The uncorrected image of the Grass: The M9 "green" is deeper, the M240 color reminds me a bit of the M8 without the IR filter. IR contamination will also produce problems in skin tones. 1. Sorry, my fault. The M240 images had no lens detection turned on. 2. Some time ago I took some shots with my M9, some with IR filter on, some with no filter (same light situation), because jaap stated that would have influence. I could not detect any differences in the skin tones. Elmar 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted February 23, 2015 Share #383 Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) The M9 has a very effective IR absorbing filter on it, and IR contamination is not much of a problem. I use the Wii light bar as a quick test, You can see the Olympus EPM1 u43 camera has much more IR bleed than does the M9. The Nikon Df- less IR bleed than the M9. The Nikon Df has about as much IR bleed as the Leica M8 with an IR cut filter over the lens. 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! My infrared album, includes test shots of the Wii lightbar with a few cameras and different filters. The Monochrome images are with the first Digital IR camera sold by Kodak. They made it for me. The devices at the bottom of the page are Infrared Scopes from the 1940s, including the prototype. Both are working, made at about the same time as the first version Leica IIIc. https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/sets/72157649532898080/with/16122245975/ The M240 picks up more IR than does the M9, my opinion formed from this thread is that IR contamination plays a large roll in the complaints regarding color rendition that I've read. I would like to see an M240 picture of a Wii light bar or a TV remote controller, any device that uses super-bright IR LED. Edited February 23, 2015 by Lenshacker Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! My infrared album, includes test shots of the Wii lightbar with a few cameras and different filters. The Monochrome images are with the first Digital IR camera sold by Kodak. They made it for me. The devices at the bottom of the page are Infrared Scopes from the 1940s, including the prototype. Both are working, made at about the same time as the first version Leica IIIc. https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/sets/72157649532898080/with/16122245975/ The M240 picks up more IR than does the M9, my opinion formed from this thread is that IR contamination plays a large roll in the complaints regarding color rendition that I've read. I would like to see an M240 picture of a Wii light bar or a TV remote controller, any device that uses super-bright IR LED. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/240288-400-leica-photographers-agree-we-love-ccd/?do=findComment&comment=2769456'>More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted February 23, 2015 Share #384 Posted February 23, 2015 This quiz should be done with IR filters on. Not really, because the last thing most users want to do is use UV/IR filters again on a regular basis. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Warwick Posted February 23, 2015 Share #385 Posted February 23, 2015 Good point. This quiz should be done with IR filters on. Please can someone explain the benefit of using an IR filter on the M240? It is not something that I have considered, so curious what the rationale and result would typically be? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmars Posted February 23, 2015 Share #386 Posted February 23, 2015 In the uncorrected/uncropped images: 1) was lens detection turned on, or the lens type set manually? The M240 image shows more vignetting than the M9. 2) The uncorrected image of the Grass: The M9 "green" is deeper, the M240 color reminds me a bit of the M8 without the IR filter. IR contamination will also produce problems in skin tones. Here is one of the three M9 photos without lens detection. Little difference. 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! 1 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/240288-400-leica-photographers-agree-we-love-ccd/?do=findComment&comment=2769527'>More sharing options...
elmars Posted February 23, 2015 Share #387 Posted February 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) 2) The uncorrected image of the Grass: The M9 "green" is deeper, the M240 color reminds me a bit of the M8 without the IR filter. IR contamination will also produce problems in skin tones. I think, the green are nearly the same. Here the two photos only with white balance and a little exposure increase (+,35) at the M9 photo. 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! 1 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/240288-400-leica-photographers-agree-we-love-ccd/?do=findComment&comment=2769542'>More sharing options...
Rick Posted February 23, 2015 Share #388 Posted February 23, 2015 Thanks elmars. From this it seems that once corrected there isn't really any difference in color at base ISO. I am even surprised at how close all of the corrected shots are to each other. This was a lot of fun. Let's do it all over again when the M360 comes out. See you then, Rick 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmars Posted February 23, 2015 Share #389 Posted February 23, 2015 If I remember it right, these are the same results that found our forum friend mjh some month ago in LFI. But no one believed it, because he only showed some color circles or something like that. Elmar Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 23, 2015 Share #390 Posted February 23, 2015 It corrects the undoubted IR sensitivity of the M240 - less than the M8 and more than the M9. In the tropics I find them a must. In North-Western Europe less so. Please can someone explain the benefit of using an IR filter on the M240? It is not something that I have considered, so curious what the rationale and result would typically be? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 23, 2015 Share #391 Posted February 23, 2015 Not really, because the last thing most users want to do is use UV/IR filters again on a regular basis.Sure - and then they screw "protective" UV filters on....I started using them again after I had too many shots IR spoiled on an - expensive- safari. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted February 23, 2015 Share #392 Posted February 23, 2015 Jaap, first of all barely ever, and definitely not at night in the city, where artificial light that is full of IR is everywhere. Secondly, you of all people know very well that IR filters cause much more degradation through cyan corners and double reflections of light sources. So you really shouldn't pretend that a UV filter, even if I did use one, would be nearly as problematic as a UV/IR filter. Please say you agree, so new users that value your opinion can hear what we had to go through with the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 23, 2015 Share #393 Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) That is true, and I normally only use them in high IR conditions like noon sun straight overhead and on lenses of 35 mm and longer, but then I find them indispensable. In night city shots I don't think IR light is ever a problem, as the eye will accept weird colour shifts easily. Like any filter: use 'em when you need 'em, otherwise not. I must admit that I never found the use really problematic on the M8 Edited February 23, 2015 by jaapv 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 23, 2015 Share #394 Posted February 23, 2015 I must admit that I never found the use really problematic on the M8 +1 And with them, more effective IR filtration than with an unfiltered M9….speaking of 2 CCD cameras. People are funny. Many of the same people who complained about having to use a UV/IR filter on the M8 now enthusiastically embrace the use of color filters on the MM….and that requires multiple filter choices depending on subject matter and preferences. Not to mention the folks who yearn for a slimmer, lighter M, and then stick on a full case and myriad accessories. Jeff 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted February 23, 2015 Share #395 Posted February 23, 2015 Here is one of the three M9 photos without lens detection. Little difference. I've often forgotten to code a lens for the M9, and am always amazed at how little vignetting appears in the image. It would be interesting to have the coefficients that are applied by the M9 and by the M240 for various lenses. As for IR cut filters, the "Hot Mirror" filters do not cut into the far red as much as the Leica and B&W filters. I use them with fast lenses and telephoto lenses with the M9. A hold-over from Kodak DCS days.Tungsten lighting has a lot of IR, fluorescent lights and LED (ones you can see) lighting have very little. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted February 23, 2015 Share #396 Posted February 23, 2015 HI Pauljust to get it straight - I'm not denying what you and others are seeing - I just don't believe that it's a function of the distinction between CCD and CMOS. I think there are a number of different reasons, part of which is the quest for higher ISO, part of which the achievement of better DR. I can give good reasons why these could be causing the phenomenon . . but no good reason why the difference between CCD and CMOS could. But hey - as I said, we can go round and round - and now we understand each other's positions pretty well, I guess the only solution is to agree to differ. All the best Unless I'm missing something, Elmars' excellent little test rather supports Jono's view, and the opinion quoted from Stefan Daniel above. Thanks for doing this. I haven't noticed a need for an IR filter (yet), and I'm a little resistant to using filters (apart from B&W filters on the Monochrom, for obvious reasons). I'm assuming that what Jaap alludes to (if I understand him correctly) is that the CMOSIS sensor is more prone to IR shimmer on dark fabrics (like the M8) than the M9 was? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 23, 2015 Share #397 Posted February 23, 2015 I'm assuming that what Jaap alludes to (if I understand him correctly) is that the CMOSIS sensor is more prone to IR shimmer on dark fabrics (like the M8) than the M9 was? http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/361314-400-leica-photographers-agree-we-love-16.html#post2888106 Of course more than black fabrics are affected by IR contamination (purple shift, not 'shimmer'), just as with colors on the M8. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted February 23, 2015 Share #398 Posted February 23, 2015 Jaap, and others, have stated the M240 has more IR leakage than does the M9, but not as much as the M8. As some may remember, the M8 colors could be altered in post-processing to look more natural. To produce consistent colors, IR filters were required. At one point I has 20 or so IR cut filters, about half bought for $5 and $10. Most people forgot what "Hot Mirror" filters were used for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted February 23, 2015 Share #399 Posted February 23, 2015 IR pollution is really problematic under tungsten light and as Jaap's says in tropical climates (emitted by plants?). I found the biggest issue in certain fabrics, suits appearing purple or brown, and on skin, where you see things like little veins etc. under the skin surface. I will dig up some photos from the M8 with IR filters. The worst was a night in Chinatown where every paper lantern in the frame left a ghost reflection. I also have a photo taken with a 35mm lens without correction turned on and you clearly see the cyan shift at the edges. IR is a tough but to crack. I had a conversation with a lens technician, who got first hand information from one of the chief designers at Zeiss about the frustrations with IR. An IR filter in front of the sensor makes it very difficult to focus light of different wavelengths on the same plane, which makes everything a design compromise. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 23, 2015 Share #400 Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) In my case the problem manifested itself as a strong yellow cast on dry foliage and grass, impossible to remove simply without destroying other colours and in neon-red blood on a kill. I had to resort to LAB techniques to get an acceptable result, and even then... Actually I gave up on midday shots, did a few B&W conversions and stuck to shots that were not so much affected. On the baboon I could not get all yellow without destroying the sky, but LAB helped, the Zebra was easier because of the black and white. 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! Edited February 24, 2015 by jaapv 2 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/240288-400-leica-photographers-agree-we-love-ccd/?do=findComment&comment=2769690'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now