B&w Digital Uv/ir Combined Filter: Hype Or Necessity

[albertknappmd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently perused the new B&W filter catalogue and noted the addition of a new hybrid filter, the UV/IR 486 designed for digital photography. The brochure stated that the additional IR filter is required as CCD sensors are "very sensitive to IR" and that the latter can "cause image degradation". Is this true?

[mike prevette]

In practice this is true, BUT most digital cameras already have a behind the lens (on sensor) IR lowpass filter that already does this. The usefullness of this filter will depend on the wavelength of IR it cuts off. This is the first i've heard of this filter.

 

_mike

[jrgeoffrion]

I recently perused the new B&W filter catalogue and noted the addition of a new hybrid filter, the UV/IR 486 designed for digital photography. The brochure stated that the additional IR filter is required as CCD sensors are "very sensitive to IR" and that the latter can "cause image degradation". Is this true?

 

In 'real life' situations, you don't need it. It was very popular when the D2h came out... it was very sensitive to IR and the IR cut filter was the solution. At $200 for a 77mm, certainly not a necessity.

[gepetto]

Heliopan also has a Digital Glass Filter for UV/IR. This filter works very well using Auto WB under artificial lighting indoors to obtain truer color reproduction with a Canon 20D in my experience.

 

I have thought of getting one for my D1 but the D1 using manual WB really excels under artificial lighting in getting true color. The D1 is really sensitive to IR so it may benefit in cleaner blue skys. The 49mm version is $86(US). So as JR mentioned they are not cheap.

[albertknappmd]

spoke with Dave Elwell at Leica Camera USA who stated that the DMR as well as the M8 had built-in IR filters that made external IR filters moot. We need not fret!