Filters

[Guest stnami]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As stated on another forum referring to filters etc as a solution

.....but for candid photography, street scenes, or event photography, the extra attention is a bloody pain.

 

And wait till the first time security checks you out, because you camera lens gleams a color that you normally only see on a spotting scope...

[j. borger]

I think i will not use filters at all and use Jamies Profile ........especially for the type of photography you refer too,

Some say his greens are not saturated enough and the profile has some influence on other colors too. This all might be true. But i see his profile as a type of "colorfilm" which responds in a certain way to color .. it's also a "film" i happen to like a lot.

You can always adjust the pictures (saturation etc.) to your liking.

I honestly think a different C1 profile or custommade profile is all you need for the photography you refer too (and if it is not Jamies profile .. there certainly will be others in the near future or you can have one custommade). You have to shoot raw though!

For B&W .... i will not use the filter anyway!

 

Great website you have btw .... with some outstanding work in it!

[Guest stevenrk]

As stated on another forum referring to filters etc as a solution

Quote:

.....but for candid photography, street scenes, or event photography, the extra attention is a bloody pain.

 

And wait till the first time security checks you out, because you camera lens gleams a color that you normally only see on a spotting scope...

 

 

See post number 50 on the thread here titled "Re: It's 8:00AM in the USA & 2:00PM in Germany, Any Word from Leica re: M8?"

 

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/9834-its-8-00am-usa-2-00pm-3.html

 

There is a photograph of the reflection of a 486 filter that gives a good sense of what it will look like from an angle in sunlight or artificial light.

[scott kirkpatrick]

DPReview has in the past few years settled on the practice of photographing the imager of any DSLR that they give a full review to. There's quite a variety of practices seen, some dark with a pale green tinge (I assume these are hybrid with both absorption and interference used) , some a strong green -- probably purely absorption -- and the Kodak DC14N which gives off a bright red color when illuminated from the side and viewed from directly above -- pure dichroic.

 

Guy, can you take a look at your DMR to see what color its imager is? From the specs, it is also pure dichroic.

 

But there is apparently no single best answer, and Leica had to make their own estimate of which factors were likely to be show-stoppers. Note that MF digital backs, like the Phase One, have no IR filter whatsoever. If you shoot fabrics with that one, an IR filter in front is mandatory.

 

scott

[Guest guy_mancuso]

On a angle looks just like a 486 cut filter. So yes the sensor on the DMR has IR blocking on it.. Now on both you really don't see the reflection until about from a 45 degree angle give or take a little. On the M8 i don't see any red reflection at all

[Guest stevenrk]

On a angle looks just like a 486 cut filter. So yes the sensor on the DMR has IR blocking on it.. Now on both you really don't see the reflection until about from a 45 degree angle give or take a little. On the M8 i don't see any red reflection at all

 

Guy, Sean, is the reflection at 45 degrees as it appears here in this photograph of a reflection of the 486 filter? Thanks

 

See post number 50 on the thread here titled "Re: It's 8:00AM in the USA & 2:00PM in Germany, Any Word from Leica re: M8?"

 

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/dig...-2-00pm-3.html

 

Steven

[rvaubel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On a angle looks just like a 486 cut filter. So yes the sensor on the DMR has IR blocking on it.. Now on both you really don't see the reflection until about from a 45 degree angle give or take a little. On the M8 i don't see any red reflection at all

 

What a minute. According to Bob McKeever of Kodak, the filter is purely absorbtive with a cutoff @ 780 nm. That would explain the constant reference to a filter thickness of .5 mm . the only coating on the lens should be the antireflective coating which shouldn't look like the red eyed monster of the "hot mirror"

 

I don't have an M8 so I am relying on the kindness of others to report the facts. The official information is sparse and contridictory.

 

Rex

BTW the RD1 has a purely absorbtive filter which would make sense for short backfocus cameras

[rvaubel]

What a minute. According to Bob McKeever of Kodak, the filter is purely absorbtive with a cutoff @ 780 nm. That would explain the constant reference to a filter thickness of .5 mm . the only coating on the lens should be the antireflective coating which shouldn't look like the red eyed monster of the "hot mirror"

 

I don't have an M8 so I am relying on the kindness of others to report the facts. The official information is sparse and contridictory.

 

Rex

BTW the RD1 has a purely absorbtive filter which would make sense for short backfocus cameras

 

Another note: I pure absorbtive filter will look like emerald green dyed glass. thats because thats what it is.

A thin film dichroic filter will look like the antireflection coating on methadrine. Expect to see a very angry, red, simmering searchlight effect. Basically look for something you would NOT want to put on the end of your camera if you were trying to be discrete.

 

Rex

[scott kirkpatrick]

What a minute. According to Bob McKeever of Kodak, the filter is purely absorbtive with a cutoff @ 780 nm.

 

Rex, in your first post, I think you misunderstood Guy. He was referring to his DMR, which uses the Kodak KAF10100 chip. That chip has a dichroic filter layer, over a cover glass with an AR coating on its back side. I interpret Guy's answer to mean that looking at the DMR sensor is like looking at a 486 filter or looking at the Kodak DC14 opened up -- red flashes!

 

The 780 nm cutoff describes the thinned-down, partially effective IR filter on the M8, which seems to be an unfortunate compromise. The RD-1's filter specs are not available, but from the picture in the DPreview archives, I suspect it is absorptive, and thicker, perhaps 0.75 mm thick, which would give a cutoff closer to 700nm, where visible red starts.

 

scott

[rvaubel]

Rex, in your first post, I think you misunderstood Guy. He was referring to his DMR, which uses the Kodak KAF10100 chip. That chip has a dichroic filter layer, over a cover glass with an AR coating on its back side. I interpret Guy's answer to mean that looking at the DMR sensor is like looking at a 486 filter or looking at the Kodak DC14 opened up -- red flashes!

 

The 780 nm cutoff describes the thinned-down, partially effective IR filter on the M8, which seems to be an unfortunate compromise. The RD-1's filter specs are not available, but from the picture in the DPreview archives, I suspect it is absorptive, and thicker, perhaps 0.75 mm thick, which would give a cutoff closer to 700nm, where visible red starts.

 

scott

 

Scott

I'm looking at the RD1 IR filter as we speak. It look to be purely absorptive and possible .75mm thick. There is definitely no dichroic film on the thing. It looks like a emerald dyed glass which is nice because thats what it is ! In my book this is what the M8 needs. Screw "astigmatism in the corners" . A little color fringing in the corners is a small price to pay for all this external filter crap. Plus a little dichroic effort could balance the +,- of the optimal design.

 

Since I don't think Leica's gonna do it, what do you know about removing the filter on the Kodak chip? This is par for the course in astrophotoghraphy land, at least when it isn't bonded. I know I'm grasping at straws to avoid external filters but the astro boys go even farther.

 

Rex

[scott kirkpatrick]

If it's epoxied on so that there is no air interface between it and the microlenses and CCD, there's nothing an ordinary mortal can do. I have seen web instructions for removing the IR cover glass from CCD's in some Nikons where there was a metal frame holding the cover glass in place, and with a tiny screwdriver you could remove the frame to replace the cover glass with a piece of plain glass. If that is how the M8 or RD-1 is assembled, you could try it, but I would bet on finding epoxy.

 

scott

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Rex, in your first post, I think you misunderstood Guy. He was referring to his DMR, which uses the Kodak KAF10100 chip. That chip has a dichroic filter layer, over a cover glass with an AR coating on its back side. I interpret Guy's answer to mean that looking at the DMR sensor is like looking at a 486 filter or looking at the Kodak DC14 opened up -- red flashes!

 

The 780 nm cutoff describes the thinned-down, partially effective IR filter on the M8, which seems to be an unfortunate compromise. The RD-1's filter specs are not available, but from the picture in the DPreview archives, I suspect it is absorptive, and thicker, perhaps 0.75 mm thick, which would give a cutoff closer to 700nm, where visible red starts.

 

scott

 

 

Yes thanks Scott i was referring to the DMR and the IR filter look the same. The M8 is dark grey