What is the problem with IR filters?

[Joseph S. Wisniewski]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree. I'm sorry guys, but this whole IR filter business has really annoyed me. Why - simply because people were not informed of this apparent great attribute beforehand.

 

I see the interested technician guys, like Guy, on the forum, paying out to work with this camera - and yet no one mentioned, at all, beforehand, that they would need these filters to get their cameras and lenses working up to par. Photographers shouldn't be treated like this. Come on...talk about trying to walk out of a tight corner... There's one thing saying no camera new off-the-shelf is immune to problems, and another accepting that you are paying through the nose for a company's mistakes...

In Leica's defense, the rest of the pack (Nikon, Canon, etc. including some rather expensive medium format camera back makers) never mentioned that you'd need these filters, either.

 

My first DSLRs were Nikon D100 bodies. I got them when they were $2000 each, and I got a pair (because I take them with me on commercial jobs where not having a backup is suicide. Do M shooters typically carry a backup?). So, that was a $4000 entry cost, and the cameras were almost as IR sensitive as M8, despite not being rangefinders. Nikon launched six different DSLRs, all with IR problems of varying severity (D1, D1X, D1H, D100, D2H, and D70) before they ever admitted publicly (in a very roundabout way) that there was a problem, and that admission came solely in the form of the D2X product announcement, mentioning that the D2X had improved IR filtration. Many of us Nikon shooters discussed methods for processing out IR contamination and the use of IR blocking filters (they were typically referred to as "hot mirrors" on Nikon forums, because that was Tiffen's term, and Tiffen IR blockers were much more readily available than B+W or Heliopan back in 2001).

 

D2H was a particular debacle, probably as sensitive as M8: IR filters weren't just discussed by a few users at the edge, they became topics of mainstream discussion. Nikon never gave us free filters, or even free advice on using filters. They simply waited a year and replaced D2H with D2Hs, having, among other fixes, a better filter. They also launched the mid line D200 and D80 with the better filter, but launched three new low end cameras (D70s, D50, and D40) with the weaker filter. D40 was launched just last month. So, there's currently 3 cameras in Nikon's lineup with IR sensitivity problems (not as severe as M8, but severe enough to be annoying) and Nikon has never mentioned it, to anyone.

 

So, sure, Leica is the first camera manufacturer to have treated their customers "like this", as you say. Everyone else has treated their customers much worse. Leica is a giant step up.

[jaapv]

...how many of your colleagues would do like you?

 

The story of my life...

[4season]

I wonder if Leica could solve all the M8 filter problems simply by using a suitably thick IR filter made of an apochromatic material like fluorite? I'm sure that particular material wouldn't cause them any problems at all

[Peter41951]

Wouldn't that make the camera heavier? There'll be more complaints......

[Lode]

Originally Posted by Joseph S. Wisniewski

 

Nikon launched six different DSLRs' date=' all with IR problems of varying severity (D1, D1X, D1H, D100, D2H, and D70) before they ever admitted publicly (in a very roundabout way) that there was a problem, and that admission came solely in the form of the D2X product announcement, mentioning that the D2X had improved IR filtration. Many of us Nikon shooters discussed methods for processing out IR contamination and the use of IR blocking filters (they were typically referred to as "hot mirrors" on Nikon forums, because that was Tiffen's term, and Tiffen IR blockers were much more readily available than B+W or Heliopan back in 2001). .[/quote']

 

 

I found this link to a thread on mastersphoto.net (2005) in dpreview forum, News Discussion,.(magenta issue and use of a 486 IR/UV cut filter on Nikon D70). This link was posted there two days ago.

 

mastersphoto.net :: View topic - Wow, the difference w/B+W 486 IR/UV cut filter on Nikon D70

[ho_co]

I found this link ... [on the topic] magenta issue and use of a 486 IR/UV cut filter on Nikon D70. This link was posted there two days ago.

mastersphoto.net :: View topic - Wow, the difference w/B+W 486 IR/UV cut filter on Nikon D70

Check out the thread and you'll see that no one is complaining that "Nikon didn't tell us." One person so far mentions the cost of the filters but isn't whining about it, and a couple posters apparently don't quite understand the problem yet--but overall, the tone is "Wow--you mean I can fix the funny color buy putting a filter on my lens? Lemme at it!"

 

As Joseph W said above: Nikon never said, "You can fix it with a filter." But the users aren't complaining or blaming Nikon, but are grateful for a fix.

 

I think Leica has done a much better job in handling this. They are playing it above board, and get slammed for it. Nikon never mentions the problem, their users have to discover the solution themselves, and no one complains.

 

Do you see anything wrong with this picture?

 

--HC