Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

Who would have guessed that this Leica gear could record UV? Not me!


Andrea B.

Recommended Posts

I am so surprised by this result!

 

The great news is that I very definitely did get a UV photo. And that in late afternoon, Northern hemisphere fall light. Not nearly as much UV as during mid-summer here.

 

The not-so-great news is that (very obviously) I couldn't quite figure out the focus compensation needed for the BaaderU. It was much larger than I thought it would be. But whatever.....if I get this gear on tripod (need a plate for the M), then that will be easy enough to determine.

 

Added: The first gen MM does not have Live View. Hence the need for determining focus compensation between visible and UV.

 

The larger flower in these photos is a Rudbeckia, our classic subject for proving UV-worthiness of any gear.

 

Gear:

Leica M Monochrom (first generation, 18 MP)

Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2.0

BaaderU UV-Pass Filter

I was using the MM in aperture mode.

 

 

Visible:

f/8 for 1/1500" @ ISO-800

Reasonably sharp for handheld.

BW points set in Photo Ninja. Minor pullback of highlights.

L1000129pn.jpg

 

 

Ultraviolet:

f/8 for 1/4"@ ISO-800

Such a fast exposure! Who would have thought it possible with this non-UV-dedicated gear??

BW points set in Photo Ninja. Slight boost of illumination slider.

L1000128pn.jpg

 

 

Unresized Visible Crop:

I've noticed that the forum software seems to very slightly soften images? So I'm just posting this "100% crop" for testing purposes.

L100012901.jpg

Link to comment
Your exposure settings are much better than the link from 2015 I provided previously. Do you have the 24mp Leica or the very first 18mp one without live view?
Link to comment

P.S. Even assuming I further advance the case that the Leica M Monochrom (Gen 1) is UV-worthy, there is a snag. ==> Leicas are just too darned expensive. Even when purchased used. You'd pay much less by simply having a non-Leica DSLR or mirrorless converted to Monochrome.

 

****

 

David - This is the Gen 1 MM having 18 pixels. Way more than enough for any web use. But no Live View.

 

 

Edit: Added LV info.

Link to comment
Ok just did the math your exposures are the same. A shot at 1/60, f4, Iso 4000 is the same as yours at Fi, 1/4, iso 800. I am rounding 3200 to 4000, but basically identical.
Link to comment
A Stranger In The Wind

Congrats Andrea on your MM243. The MM243 is a better sensor as it is CCD the MM246 which gives Live View was switched to a CMOS sensor.

 

Even though the MM243 is only 18 MP it is still very sharp compared with the MM246.

 

On the topic of expensive, it is best to just close my eyes and hand over the plastic and then do a memory erase of ever doing it. Alas I ended up having both the MM243 and MM246. The MM246 has video capabilties and the MM243 has the better dynamic range for the greys.

 

Seriously I never regretted the Monochrom, I often take one of them out for just shooting B&W and occasionally UV or IR.

 

A word of warning if you ever decide to pick up a Zeiss ZM lens and do some IR shooting take something to wrap around the lens where it connects to the body. There is a small hole in the Zeiss ZM body that will let in light and cause a flare in IR exposures. That is eliminated when you cover the mount area. Only happens with the Zeiss ZMs. Leica lenses(watch out the cost lots too) or lens attached with an adapter (Canon,Nikon,Minolta) are fine in IR.

Link to comment
A Stranger In The Wind
One other tip for you the Monochrom images are usually a little muddy straight out of camera. Do adjustments with curves in PP (make it into an S curve) to get response of the mid greys.
Link to comment

It is there today! I don't know why I couldn't see it last night.

Cool photo.

 


 

Robert, thank you for your Monochrom tips. I have referred to your original post about the MM. I did experience the Honking Red Blink which went on like forever. I had a honking green afterimage because I was staring at it for so long trying to figure out what the MM was doing! Then my brain toggled and I remembered your advice about turning the cam off and popping the battery (in some order). :lol:

 

I am far too happy with the Nikon D850 to pursue any additions to the Leica gear. But I certainly am enjoying the MM + Summicron combo. It is refreshing to compose through a split image rangefinder and be Live Viewless.

Link to comment
A Stranger In The Wind

I am far too happy with the Nikon D850 to pursue any additions to the Leica gear.

 

Your pocketbook thanks you. :)

 

That is a good combo with the summicron. Unlike dslr shooters many Rangefinder shooters love the 50mm focal length. I find that is the focal length I use most. Keeping the MM gear to a minimum is the best way to go.

 

I would suggest you look into adding an adapter for using classic F lenses or other mounts to attach to it. You lose composing through the split image rangefinder but if the lens has Hyperfocal markings you have more lens options available to use on the monochrom. I often attach my old FD lenses. I also have Nikon and minolta adapters too. The rangefinder returns me back to the days when I shot film. The bonus was the IR and UV opportunities.

 

Speaking of IR do not use a filter stronger than IR720 the sensor does not record anything useful much beyond that. I tried a B+W093 and it was really awful looking. Filters with IR720 or less come out looking real good.

Link to comment

Speaking of IR do not use a filter stronger than IR720 the sensor does not record anything useful much beyond that. I tried a B+W093 and it was really awful looking. Filters with IR720 or less come out looking real good.

 

Wait, what do you mean by that? Is it only the Leica that has this problem? Normally we get plenty of light with the B+W093 and similar?

Link to comment

I am assuming the internal filter in the Leica is probably BG38, BG40, or the like, which both transmit UV but block most or all IR depending on thickness, so the camera can sense UV but has the IR suppressed.

Andrea, Is this the case? Have you tried any IR filters with your Leica yet?

I think the Nikon D800 monochrome conversion Bob has from MaxMax is set up similarly, with a BG38 internal filter.

Ask Bob about this, he will explain the reason why.

 

Also, keep in mind there may be other sensor conversion differences between the monochrome conversion Bob has and the monochrome Leica.

Link to comment

even though it passes UV, i would think the stock leica would have some level of IR block as that would be a substantial phenomenology contributor as well as producing unsharp images for visible intent.. so a BG-38 comes to mind.. it was the filter i requested in my D800M

 

as for lenses, most lenses would block the UV so i am actually surprised the Summicron-M 50mm f/2.0 passes UV at all frankly..

Link to comment
Yeah, I was misled by the comment saying “...the sensor does not record anything useful...” when that really meant sensor+IR blocker.
Link to comment

....most lenses would block the UV so i am actually surprised the Summicron-M 50mm f/2.0 passes UV at all frankly..

 

Me too !!!

 

 

.

Link to comment

Great point about the lens. I missed that. Andrea, do you own an f mount to M mount adapter or an M42 to M mount adapter?

 

Would be interesting to see one of your quartz lens on there and really see what the monochrome Leica can do.

Link to comment

Thing is about lenses...

Let's take the Nikon 18mm f/4, maybe the best 18mm lens for UV, yet it doesn't transmit UV all that well, but it will produce a UV pattern, like from a Rudbeckia, or such.

I think it cuts off to absolute 0 at 360nm, and is 50% at 395nm.

The 18/4 is not what I would call a good UV transmitting lens, but it works. I am sure there are worse newer lenses of any focal length to use for UV, but a lot of lenses will work,

and I might add that monochrome eliminates the false color range, which is another difference we would see between lenses in false color Bayer UV shots.

Link to comment

Cadminum: If the sun ever returns (I keep having to say that!), then I will try the 340/10 filter on that Summicron. Just for grins. :D

 

David: No, unfortunately I don't currently have any M-mount adapters. That is easily remedied however. B)

Link to comment
A Stranger In The Wind

Wait, what do you mean by that? Is it only the Leica that has this problem? Normally we get plenty of light with the B+W093 and similar?

 

With the Leica they had issues with the M8 recording too much IR in their images and many users mentioned there was too much red in the images. Leica came out with filters to lessen the impact of UV and IR wavelengths. With the M9 Leica subdued the IR wavelengths at the sensor.

 

Leica uses the same sensor in the MM243 as the M9 and the MM246 as the M240.

 

The images I tried with the 093 attached were very muddy, little to no contrast and had extremely long exposure times. I didn't bother testing the 093 any further just switched to 092 which gave pleasing results.

Link to comment
That is to say, the internal UV/IR blocker was very weak in initial digital Leica M bodies. The strength of the filter was increased in subsequent Leica M bodies.
Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...