Nikon D850 With 720 Filter At Mt. Aso, Kumamoto, Japan

[Andrew O'Neill]

 

[reddesert]

Nice photos!

Something to try, if you are interested in digital IR without converting a camera, is to pick up an old Nikon D70. The D70's IR blocking filter lets a bit more IR through than the IR filters of most subsequent cameras. One still needs to do a long exposure, but it can be a lot shorter than with later DSLRs (like 1/2-1 sec instead of 30 sec, in good sunlight at a medium aperture). Mine even works with a 760nm filter, which is a bit of overkill. The disadvantage of the D70 is it's only 6 mp APS-C, but that means it's really inexpensive now (like $30 in the US), and the image quality is perfectly fine for web use.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Nice photos!

Something to try, if you are interested in digital IR without converting a camera, is to pick up an old Nikon D70. The D70's IR blocking filter lets a bit more IR through than the IR filters of most subsequent cameras. One still needs to do a long exposure, but it can be a lot shorter than with later DSLRs (like 1/2-1 sec instead of 30 sec, in good sunlight at a medium aperture). Mine even works with a 760nm filter, which is a bit of overkill. The disadvantage of the D70 is it's only 6 mp APS-C, but that means it's really inexpensive now (like $30 in the US), and the image quality is perfectly fine for web use.

That's good to know! Thanks. I was working at ISO 64. After the photo was taken, I had to wait about 30 seconds for it to render. I need to see if there is much difference in image quality with a higher ISO setting...

 

[Paul Howell]

One thing I like about my Sigma SD 15 is that the IR filter is removable.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

One thing I like about my Sigma SD 15 is that the IR filter is removable.

Wow really?? I wish DSLR's had that option. Wouldn't it be nice with the flick of a switch, you could work without that IR blocking filter?

 

[reddesert]

That's good to know! Thanks. I was working at ISO 64. After the photo was taken, I had to wait about 30 seconds for it to render. I need to see if there is much difference in image quality with a higher ISO setting...

If you have "long exposure noise reduction" (or whatever that setting is called) turned on, when you take a long exposure, you'll have to wait a long time for it to render. Without looking it up, I think that what it does is, (loosely) if you take a 30 second exposure, it then takes a 30 second dark frame and subtracts the two. If you turn this off, it should render more quickly.

Also, when I do this digital-unconverted-IR thing, I just set the camera to the default ISO of 200 or so, and set exposure by guess or prior knowledge and bracket, I don't meter through the filter. For ex in moderate sunlight with the IR760 filter on the D70, I might get good results at about 1/2 sec and f/8.

 

[reddesert]

Here's an example with the unconverted D70 and an IR760 filter (ISO 200, 2 sec, with I think a 28/3.5 lens at about f/8):

Cloudbursts, Arizona by reddesert64, on Flickr

 

[mshchem]

Nice video! Yeah I agree that the shelters might not be adequate Still it's a nice gesture. You got some nice pictures!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Here's an example with the unconverted D70 and an IR760 filter (ISO 200, 2 sec, with I think a 28/3.5 lens at about f/8):

Cloudbursts, Arizona by reddesert64, on Flickr

Thank you so much for the information! Yes, I do have the long exposure noise reduction turned on. I'll try it with it off. I also don't metre through the filter. It's been guess work.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Nice video! Yeah I agree that the shelters might not be adequate Still it's a nice gesture. You got some nice pictures!

Thank you! Aso san never lets me down!