Jump to content

UV/IR filter


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hard for Leica to acknowledge that some of its flagship cameras are still prone to IR contamination i guess. Hence the statement of Mr Karbe referred to by our colleague mnutzer above i suspect (#4). Now i don't know if the M10 did improve compared to the M240 from this point. Just curious as my digital CL is more efficient than my M240 on IR cutting.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t understand the resistance. We all know digital M cameras are sensitive to ir due to thin sensor filter. Why not offer an option? Nothing would change for those not using filters


Firmware bloat and menu clutter.


Everyone has ideas about features Leica could add to the operating system - but eventually one would get firmware larger than MicroSoft Word/Office (the epitome of "feature-bloat"). 3GB?- Bah!


I write everything with Apple's TextEdit - 10.1 Mb. Keep things simple - the essentials - Das Wesentliche.


Get the mods to post a poll for you - "How many M10/typ240 owners want the firmware option restored to correct for external UV/IR filters: not interested at all - not very important - somewhat important - very important?"


If you can get to 25% "somewhat/very important" then maybe you have a case. But Leica shouldn't be jerking the firmware around for 1% or 5% of users. They have better things to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only to bore you furthermore...


Here are two different examples. Summicron 1:2/75mm Asph at f 5.6; WB adjusted in LR to Temp 4650, Tint +39 for both examples. In both cases with lens detection on "Auto".


First without filter:







Now with 49mm UV/IR Cut (Leica 13412):







I tried hard to see any differences, but I could not find anything. Same for lens detection "off" and also with UVa filter (I don't show these example, because there really is no difference).


To sum it up: UV/IR Cut filters can be used without any problems with lenses of 50mm or longer which do not show any "Italian Flag Issues". Lens detection will make no difference in both cases as far as colour shift is concerned.


If you use wide angle lenses with UV/IR Cut filters there may be a noticable cyan shift under conditions which stimulate colour shift (my "stress test" in the other examples above represents conditions which are extremely prone to show colour shift).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 9/30/2018 at 8:38 AM, lm_user said:

While I was really happy to get full-frame when the M9 came out - I was absolutely ecstatic to get rid of the stupid UV/IR filters.As noted above bh orhers, there are circumstances where ir contamination is still sn issue Using ir cut filters in thise situations requires corrections in post


+1.  I keep one in my bag (my travel lenses all take 39mm) in case I encounter a herd of black synthetics resting under green foliage under tropical sun.  So far I never had to resort to attaching it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I took pictures with the M8 mostly of landscapes rather than people who might be wearing clothing that might look odd with IR input, I had the IR cut filters but never really used them. AND I was able to take some nice IR photos with actual IR filters that I used to use with Kodak HIE.  So I guess I'd say ditto.

Recently I heard a review of a medium format digital (I think) which was also IR sensitive, only it was being talked about as a plus (which is how I'd describe the M8). I still liked the resolution of the M9 and the ability to use my lenses with their original angles of view though. Still keep the M8 for the IR photography.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, carbon_dragon said:

A long time ago, there used to be color enhancing filters which gave color a cast, but if you did a re-white balance when printing (which the machines tended to do), the color was supposedly improved somehow. It was never quite clear how this was meant to work.

Colored filters can change the relationships between colors, as well as producing an overall cast. WB will remove the overall cast, but not the change in relationships. A few examples:

- Shoot a picture of a piece of white paper alongside a sheet of yellow paper, under yellow indoor lights (effectively the same as using a yellow filter). White-balance away the overall yellow, and often the papers come out the same color (or same white).

- Shoot a portrait under indoor yellow light, and correct it for white, and skin colors usually come out too magenta - requires a separate "camera calibration profile" to dial the red hues back towards yellow to avoid a "sunburned" look to the skin.

- deep in the distant past, a woman came into the camera store where I worked, and handed us a roll of color neg film to develop and print. She mentioned in passing she had used a deep yellow filter to darken the sky. "Oooops!" we all thought. But in fact we were able to remove the extreme yellow overall cast in the lab - and she did get nearly black skies, just as she'd expected (also dark blue/black jeans and anything else originally blue.) The blue-sensitive layer of the film was simply so underexposed in "pure" blue parts of the picture that there was no blue left to recover.

As I recall (never used them myself), those enhancing filters were usually a violet, magenta or moderate yellow-orange. A magenta filter, for example, would pass the reds of fall foliage while partially suppressing the greens - which, when corrected, would produce "normal" greens and "electric" enhanced red and yellow foliage, and intense blue skies. Some of those may have been dichroic, like the UV/IR filters (except mostly in visible wavelengths) - and I believe some also came with polarizers "between" two polarized color layers, so that they could be dialed to be more magenta or more yellow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...