Comments please about Image-Laboratory camera conversion ad on Ebay

[OlDoinyo]

I agree that there are numerous yellow if not red flags here. Evidently the person who put together the advertisement is not familiar with UV or IR photography, and that hardly inspires confidence! It is of course possible that the person actually doing the work is someone else, but I would want some independent evaluations of actual work done before doing business with this firm. And why would you want AR coating on the glass, anyway?

 

NB: The preservation of the piezoelectric dust-shaker is a laudable goal, but not all cameras have these. Some cameras have a different kind of shaker based on the image-stabilization system, and this is not normally lost in conversion.

[enricosavazzi]

[...]

And why would you want AR coating on the glass, anyway?

[...]

AR coatings can be optimized for specific wavelengths. For example, when choosing a fused silica window from Thorlabs for a personal project earlier this year, I was able to choose AR coatings optimized for NUV. One possible question for Image-Laboratory could be what wavelength interval their AR coatings are optimized for. Even in a multi-spectral camera, if one often shoots UV, then it makes sense to use UV-optimized coatings for maximum transmission. VIS and NIR efficiency are less of a problem because of the much higher sensor sensitivity at these wavelengths.

[colinbm]

I have found this info that Imaging Labotatory may also be Neimart Technology...

http://www.ebay.com/...=item2345cdbb51

I have taken the liberty to copy to here the transmittance charts for the, Full Spectrum by using AR coated borosilicate glass as the new protective filter.

Col

 

Full Spectrum by using AR coated borosilicate glass as the new protective filter.

[Shane]

Another red flag that they appear to be stumbling around in the dark (pun intended) with regards to this technology, for example vacuum UV is a designation for wavelengths shorter than 200nm not longer.

[Andrea B.]

These kinds of Ebay sellers sometimes present a problem for us as a UV website. Do we whitelist them? Do we blacklist them?

Do we simply avoid mentioning them in the Stickies where we try to give a beginner some idea of how to get into shooting digital UV?

 

Perhaps I should open a separate thread about Camera Conversion and gather everyone's ideas and recommendations.

[JCDowdy]

Perhaps descriptions of gear in our postings should ID the conversion service?

example:

Panasonic DMC-G3 full spectrum modified (LifePixel) , UKA UV 50mm f/3.5, 1/15 sec, ISO 160 & f/11, 1.25” Baader UV/IR cut filter.

[colinbm]

Image Laboratory; DPR, For Sale forum, Rensol ; Neimart Technology; Neimart.com; rensolomon123@gmail.com;

Very impressive here....

https://www.linkedin.../karenmarkosyan

 

I purchased one of his filters on eBay...

http://www.ebay.com....984.m1497.l2649

 

Return address....

Gary Markosyan

52 Hazelhurst Ave

West Newton, MA

02465 USA

 

Oh yeah the filter....... U340 & U340....

These are RAW files converted to .jpg, with no processing, except cropped to full width of frame & labelled.

 

 

The test was with an Anici Prism Spectroscope, attached to a full spectrum Sigma DP2.

All taken at the same blank part of sky with the same camera settings, ISO100, F8 at 1 second.

First no filter.

Second with the Neimart U430 filter, 52mm x 1mm.

Third with my U340 filter, 52mm x 1mm, purchased from a recognised eBay sell, that many of us purchase from.

 

Should I be happy with this purchase ?

Cheers

Col

[colinbm]

He has a YouTube too

Col

[Andrea B.]

Seems like everyone wants to get into the conversion business. Hard to imagine that there are a whole lot of photographers "out there" who need full spectrum conversions ?? Most dabble in it for awhile - making a few floral bullseye fotos - and then move on to other pursuits.

 

I'm beginning to think that I should investigate ordering and mounting filters. I'll bet we could all do this more cheaply ourselves??

[JCDowdy]

I don't know, some of these filters are getting pretty cheap. For example this 52mm UV IR Cut at ~1/10th the price of the Baader. I am sure the Baader is higher quality but I doubt I could DIY one of these for less.

[colinbm]

Ha ha, caveat emptor !

“The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten” – Benjamin Franklin

 

Would you really buy this filter, unknown, without a transmittance chart, or brand name ?

I have dozens of 'hot mirrors', & dozens of different transmittance charts & they differ widely, but I use them to their advantage.

But to put one on a lens & think that I had a 'hot mirror' in place..........yuck !

It would be like using a latex contraception device with, one hole or two holes or three holes.......get what I mean........

Col

[enricosavazzi]

I don't know, some of these filters are getting pretty cheap. For example this 52mm UV IR Cut at ~1/10th the price of the Baader. I am sure the Baader is higher quality but I doubt I could DIY one of these for less.

Some of these filters may actually be uncoated BG38 or BG39, which do cut NIR but transmit enough NUV to contaminate VIS data if used on a full-spectrum camera.

[Andrea B.]

I am rollin' my eyes at that blue-green "UVIR" cut filter !! Those people have no idea what they are selling.

[JCDowdy]

Despite Franklin's sage words I purchased one of these just over a year ago. Mine is labeled "NEEWER BK UV IR CUT" on the case and I cost $17.95 with free shipping. It is not a BG type filter, it is pretty much the real deal. That blue color is a reflection from the dichroic coating, held at a different angle the same surface looks pink. I have to confess I have not used it enough to say if it is any good or not.

 

The transmittance band is slightly blue shifted relative to the Baader UV/IR-Cut on both the short and long side. The Newer has 265nm HBW/383-648nm (probably not suitable for UVIVF) and the Baader 264nm HWB/418-682nm. You can see the waviness imparted by multi layered coatings. We also see a tip up toward the long side due to my neglecting to control internal reflectance from the filter back into the sphere because I like to see what it looks like. Since the throughput of the sphere is ~10% this is on the same scale as uncoated 1st surface reflection. I do not know what the reflectance of an unfiltered sensor would be.

 

 

 

If we look at the spectra on a log transmittance scale we a can see just how deep the blocking really goes. I did not scan them beyond 800nm, that is as far as the double grating OL-756-PMT spectroradiometer will scan. One of these days I will scan them out to ~1100-1200nm with a double grating InGaAs spectroradiometer to see just how well the NIR side is blocking.

 

[colinbm]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/52mm-UV-IR-infrared-UltraViolet-Cut-blocking-Lens-filter-for-DSLR-DC-CCD-EM-01-/380929839174?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item58b1301046

Well I can't get one, because they won't ship to Australia ?

Col

[JCDowdy]

http://www.ebay.com/...=item58b1301046

Well I can't get one, because they won't ship to Australia ?

Col

Check the eBay Store shipping policy, "Australasia" is a ship to location.

 

Mine was from a different eBay vendor who is not stocking them now.

[colinbm]

Thanks John

They have barred contact with the seller, & when I click 'buy now', it rejects the order........

Col

[Andrea B.]

John, a question about Post #39.

If this Neewer filter is passing that much UV between 365nm - 400nm, then should we really be recommending it for use as a UV/IR Cut Filter?

Not that any of our filters are "perfect", but some are better than others.

[JCDowdy]

I would have to say it depends on what one needs a UV/IR cut filter for. I commented it probably is not suitable as a barrier filter for UVIVF. However, if the aim is to use a converted camera for near normal Vis response it might not be so bad - with some help. Interestingly several of the old classic UV filters I have scanned cut off shorter than the Baader UV/IR-Cut also.

 

When my camera was converted I requested the removed components be returned as well. Mine, as I suspect most, had two filters, a very thin dust shaker with UV/IR cut coatings and a rather thick BG colored type glass. I measured both of these independently and together. I will search for those spectra and compare with this.

 

Point being is that using the relatively thin Baader UV/IR cut in place of the stock filter stack is possibly further from original function than something like the spectra in #39 stacked with an added absorptive BG. I am going to stack this NEEWER UV IR Cut with my S8612 and see how my G3 likes it for Vis.

[colinbm]

The Baader & Neewer IRC's together look like they are a match for Sigma cameras for visible.

Col

[JCDowdy]

Thanks John

They have barred contact with the seller, & when I click 'buy now', it rejects the order........

Col

 

That is odd since it is listed on eBay Australia also. Here is the same filter on a different site. I have never used AliExpress. It seems also be on Amazon. All I did was Google "NEEWER UV IR Cut 52mm" so perhaps you can find a seller you are familiar with who will ship down under, assuming you still want it given comments above.

[colinbm]

Thanks John

I'll see who I can squeeze one out of.

I have plenty of 'hot mirrors' with a wide difference of cut on & cut off points. I like to mix & match them to get custom ranges.

Col

[baffe]

Refering to "8) Claim that "if you will not use any filter.....[then] inside buildings with custom white balance it will be pretty much the same picture as there is not much IR light inside buildings".

 

Some testshots with converted Olympus EPL1 (no HM, M42 Lens Pentacon 50mm f1.8) on ISO3200 with RGB (adjustable color) LED. Custom WB to the white wall. As there is no ir and no uv pictures look like the following examples. Unfortunately the led is not very bright for taking pictures, but bright enough to read a book in the bed.

 

http://up.picr.de/20737593od.jpg

 

http://up.picr.de/20737594hr.jpg

 

http://up.picr.de/20737597rt.jpg

 

Doesn't look too bad I think.

 

But the conditions to take good vis pictures with this (modified) cam need to be very "synthetic". If there is only one incandescent lamp in the same area it doesn't work at all. I'd never use that cam to shoot vis pics.

[colinbm]

I did once, for the exercise, take a photo at night, indoors, with the full spectrum, Sigma DP2, with 'daylight' fluorescent tube lighting only, & the images were pretty normal.

Col

[Andrea B.]

If you are doing documentary work or product work, then regardless of light, you would probably want to go ahead and profile the camera colours because fluorescent and LED lights also have a colour temperature.

 

The human eye/brain is notoriously adaptable to light and sees what it wants to see.

So I've been surprised more than once at how much the colours had been 'off' after I saw the shift from application of a profile. But I'm being a real stickler this morning about colour, so kindly disregard. It's because I have to write about these things a lot, so I seem to have developed a stong stance about it. :lol: ;)

 

**************

 

Col, don't worry, nobody remembers all the PhotoShop steps for everything. I write them down and keep a little PS recipe folder. The Color Brush works equally well in your situation, but **I** am mos def not a good selector in PS. It's tedious and tricky for me. So I use the other method more.

 

**************

 

I have more about the Violet problem in cameras from member Shane Elen. I will start a topic about it later. Today and tomorrow I have various other things to take care of.

TTYL