IR Filters: 486 vs 489

[t0tor0]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

hi guys:

 

have been reading about IR filters.

 

anyone care to input some insights into the difference between B+W 486 and 489 filters?

 

thanks

[Advertisement]

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

[erl]

Far from being an expert, my opinion is that any difference between them is easily overcome by the RAW converter you use.

[ArtZ]

A friend of mine is using an Edmund Optics 49mm IR/UV with the WATE. It works exactly as a Leica filter. No cyan issues.

 

Edmund Optics - Mounted IR Filters

 

B+W #489 is very similar to Leica filters but it's only IR cut (no UV). People have reported a slight greenish tint. I'm using a B+W #489 with my Nokton 35/1.2. I haven't noticed yet this issue with this lens. Colours are normal in all situations.

 

Cheers!

.

[pascal_meheut]

Unless I'm wrong, the 489 is an IR filter: it let only the IR pass through. The 486 does the exact contrary.

[ArtZ]

Unless I'm wrong, the 489 is an IR filter: it let only the IR pass through. The 486 does the exact contrary.

 

Salut Pascal,

 

With all my respects you're wrong. Both filters are very similar. #486 filters IR and UV. #489 filters only IR but strongly than #486.

 

You can take a look here:

 

In English:

http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/pdf/filter/katalog_e.pdf

 

In French:

http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/pdf/filter/katalog_f.pdf (Page 21)

 

 

Filtres B+W 486,486-W

Ce filtre interférentiel UV-IR-Cut bloque complètement les rayons UV et IR souvent indésirables. Il est tout particulièrement conseillé dans le domaine CCD lorsque les capteurs numériques d'image ne sont pas équipés de filtre de protection IR. Autres domaines d'application: vidéo, photographie numérique et traditionnelle NB/couleur ainsi qu'applications techniques. Version tons chauds avec KR 1,5 comme verre de base. N° de commande 486-W

 

Filtre B+W 489

Ce filtre laisse passer le spectre visible, mais anénue fortement l'infrarouge à partir de 780 nm. Souvent utilisé pour la protection contre les rayons IR, notamment pour la protection des capteurs CCD.

 

Amicalement,

 

Manuel

[pascal_meheut]

With all my respects you're wrong. Both filters are very similar. #486 filters IR and UV. #489 filters only IR but strongly than #486.

 

Ok. Thanks for the info.

[mjh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

anyone care to input some insights into the difference between B+W 486 and 489 filters?

The 486 is an interference filter blocking IR quite effectively; the 489 is, as far as I know, a much less effective absorption filter (at least it isn’t as effective for the near infrared part of the spectrum).

[t0tor0]

thanks guys...

 

so the next question probably is how does it affect pictures taken on M8?

 

how will the pictures turn out differently?

 

will the 489 correct the magenta color problem?

[ArtZ]

thanks guys...

 

so the next question probably is how does it affect pictures taken on M8?

 

how will the pictures turn out differently?

 

will the 489 correct the magenta color problem?

 

If you're using the WATE or a focal lens under 35mm with the M8, I would highly recommend you to use the Leica filters. If you cannot find the Leica IR/UV filter for your lens and you want to use an IR filter, I would use:

 

1.- an Edmond Optics IR/UV filter you can order on the Internet. They're very similar to the Leica ones but MUCH more expensive. No cyan even with the WATE at 16mm

 

2.- a B+W #489 for the WATE and lenses under 35mm (you can also use it for all lenses). No cyan with the WATE but the color tone can be a bit greenish. Very easy to correct with Photoshop.

 

3.- a B+W #486 for all lenses above 28mm. This filter is very easy to find. Some cyan on corners when used with the WATE. After 21mm the cyan issue fades out. At 35mm no cyan.

 

Cheers!

.

[ho_co]

FYI--

Michael is correct in his remarks: 489 is not an IR-cut but an IR-absorptive filter; 489 and 486 have different transmission curves.

 

My Edmund UV/IR-cut filter came in a package marked "Schneider" and its mount is engraved 486. It is apparently identical to the B+W 486, with the possible exception of its flatness grade. Edmund mentions flatness grade, but I haven't seen that figure published by B+W.

 

There were a couple forum comments on this topic recently with some comparison photos. The poster felt that 489's were okay if one white balanced before shooting. (Search forum for details.)

 

--HC

[dante]

The 486 is an interference filter blocking IR quite effectively; the 489 is, as far as I know, a much less effective absorption filter (at least it isn’t as effective for the near infrared part of the spectrum).

 

Michael -

 

To update an old thread - I was working on this today with a full-spectrum-converted Fuji X100 and can tell you that the results you get with the M8 is a product of adding the filter to the IR filter in the camera. The filters' characteristics are a bit different where they are the only control on IR:

 

- The 486 is indeed an interference filter. It lets quite a bit of near IR bleed through. Auto color balancing works most of the time.

 

- The 489 is an absorption filter and does almost exactly the same thing, with different overall casts to overcome in AWB. No corner casts.

 

Both of these have some issues in incandescent room light. In fact, they act like an M8 with no IR filter, just more severely.

 

Dante

[jaapv]

FYI--

Michael is correct in his remarks: 489 is not an IR-cut but an IR-absorptive filter; 489 and 486 have different transmission curves.

 

My Edmund UV/IR-cut filter came in a package marked "Schneider" and its mount is engraved 486. It is apparently identical to the B+W 486, with the possible exception of its flatness grade. Edmund mentions flatness grade, but I haven't seen that figure published by B+W.

 

There were a couple forum comments on this topic recently with some comparison photos. The poster felt that 489's were okay if one white balanced before shooting. (Search forum for details.)

 

--HC

B&W and Schneider are the same company.

[dhsimmonds]

For what it's worth, I successfully used a Hoya Pro R72 IR filter with my Fuji X-1 Pro. I was advised by an experienced IR photographer that it particularly suited the colour arrangement of the Fujifilm sensor. The resulting images were rather pleasing after conversion to black and white. I don't know of anyone using it with an M8 sensor though

[bocaburger]

When I had an M8 I used primarily the Heliopan UV/IR filters as they seemed to have much better and more durable anti-reflective coating. The B+W 486 and the Leica UV/IR filters seemed pretty much identical in practice to me. The 489 was my choice with the CV 12mm. It appeared to correct the corner cast better than the others. (My 12 is the LTM version and I made a filter holder using a couple of filter mounts with glass removed and screwed together...the front one was 55mm and I forgot what the rear one was but it pushed over the front of the lens and held on by friction fit. Because of the M8's crop factor the 55mm filter dod not vignette).