Andrea B. Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Purpose of Test: To verify that each lens can shoot "at infinity" in Vis/IR/UV and can record in those wavelengths. Subject: Landscape of Trees and VinesTarget: Each lens was focused way out there on the trees. "-)Location: Huber Woods Park, Middletown, New Jersey, USADate: 17 September 2014Camera: Pentax K5-broadbandRaw Converter/Editor: Photo NinjaTIFF to JPG Converter: Photo Mechanic Visible White Balance: Visible light profiles were made for each lens using the Color Checker Passport profiling grid in Photo Ninja. These profiles correct white balance. IR White Balance: The Photo Ninja Color Correction dropper was dragged over the photo diagonal from lower left to upper right to provide a kind of average white balance over the scene. This is a bit of a primitive white balancing method, but because the B+W 093 IR-Pass filter produces an almost monochrome photograph so the method suffices. UV White Balance: UV profiles were made for each lens by photographing Labsphere reflective standards. After making the white balance correction on the white standard, the visible light profile for that lens was applied. Post #5 below has an illustration of the Visible and UV white balance for one of the tested lenses. Visible Edits: Profiled WB as described above. Exposure and highlights sliders adjusted as needed. Default sharpening and default colour noise removal. Default Neutral colour setting. Detail slider = 15. No local edits. IR Edits: Average WB as described above. Exposure and highlights sliders adjusted as needed. Default sharpening and default colour noise removal. Default Neutral colour setting. Detail slider = 20. No local edits. UV Edits: Profiled WB as described above. Exposure and highlights sliders adjusted as needed. Default sharpening and default colour noise removal. Default Neutral colour setting. Detail slider = 15. No local edits. Note: I worked hard to get good exposures so the exposure adjustments mentioned above were quite minimal. UV Capability: As always, remember that light varies during a shoot, so please do not overinterpret the speeds given here except to note that the Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar, a dedicated UVIR-lens which is fully corrected in UV/Visible/IR wavelengths, gives the fastest exposure time in this test.Although I noted that two of the 35mm lenses were slightly faster in UV than the remaining lenses (UAT excepted), it is only by 1/3 of a stop. I'm not sure this is a meaningful margin.The saturation of the converted UV photo was tripled to show center/edge differences which are a common occurence in landscapes due to vignetting, light fall-off and other factors.All UV photos were made at f/11 and ISO 400. The 35sAsahi Opt. Co. 35/4.0 Takumar = 1" (ties for fastest 35, 2nd fastest overall, but not by much!!)A.Schacht Ulm 35/3.5 R Travegon = 2"Isco-Göttingen 35/3.5 Westron = 2"Kyoei Optical Co. 35/3.5 W.Acall = 1.3"Meyer-Optik Görlitz 35/3.5 Primagon = 1.3"Novoflex 35/3.5 Noflexar = 1" (ties for fastest 35, 2nd fastest overall, but not by much!!) The 50sAsahi-Kogaku 50/3.5 Takumar = 1.3"Carl Zeiss Jena 50/3.5 Tessar = 2.5"E.Ludwig 50/2.9 Meritar = 2" The LongsAsahi 85/3.5 Quartz Takumar = 1.3" (so much for the idea that quartz gives a speedy UV lens)Asahi 85/4.5 Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar = 1/1.7" (da winnah !!)Asahi 135/3.5 Takumar = 1.6" ************************************************************************ All photos may be clicked for a larger view. Lens: Asahi Opt. Co. 35mm f/4.0 Takumar #1994XXMount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ~345nmFilter: 46mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/60" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/80" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 1" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Lens: A.Schacht Ulm 35mm f/3.5 R Travegon #1542XXMount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ?Filter: 49mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/80" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/125" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 2" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Lens: Isco-Göttingen 35mm f/3.5 Westron #6823XXMount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ?Filter: 46mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/80" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/80" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 2" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Published: 18 Sept 2014Updated: 24 Sept 2014Lens name correction. "W.Acall ... Kyoei" changed to "Kyoei Optical Co. ... W. Acall". Link to comment
Andrea B. Posted September 18, 2014 Author Share Posted September 18, 2014 All photos may be clicked for a larger view. Lens: Meyer-Optik Görlitz 35mm f/3.5 Primagon #28375XXMount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ~345nmFilter: 46mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/60" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/100" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 1.3" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Lens: Novoflex 35mm f/3.5 Noflexar #3595XXMount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ~330nmFilter: 49mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/100" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/100" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 1" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Lens: Kyoei Optical Co. 35mm f/3.5 W. Acall #358XXThe letter 'W' supposedly stands for 'Wide'.Mount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ?Filter: 46mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/60" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/80" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 1.3" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Published: 18 Sept 2014Updated: 24 Sept 2014Lens name correction. "W.Acall ... Kyoei" changed to "Kyoei Optical Co. ... W. Acall". Link to comment
Andrea B. Posted September 18, 2014 Author Share Posted September 18, 2014 All photos may be clicked for a larger view. Lens: Asahi-Kogaku 50mm f/3.5 Takumar #905XXMount: M37Adapter: M37/M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ?Filter: The front of the lens has no filter threads, so filters were held in place while shooting. Visible Light [f/11 for 1/200" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/250" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 1.3" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Lens: Carl Zeiss Jena 50mm f/3.5 Tessar #36390XX (has a red mark)Mount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ?Filter: 40.5mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/60" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/80" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 2.5" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Lens: E.Ludwig 50mm f/2.9 Meritar #13919XXMount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ?Filter: 35.5mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/80" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/60" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 2" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Link to comment
Andrea B. Posted September 20, 2014 Author Share Posted September 20, 2014 All photos may be clicked for a larger view. Lens: Asahi Opt. Co. 85mm f/3.5 Quartz-Takumar #949XXXThis is a bellows lens which was used on an M42 helicoid. The lens exhibits a great deal of chromatic abberation in the Visible and UV photos. The lens is meant to be used with narrowband filters.Mount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: 200mm from manufacturer's specificationsFilter: 49mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/25" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/20" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 1.3" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter]Serious chromatic abberation under a broadband UV-pass filter is seen in this UV photo as a kind of soft glow. Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Lens: Asahi Opt. Co. 85mm f/4.5 Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar #3605XXXMount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: 220nm from manufacturer's specificationsFilter: 49mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/125" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter]The color was profiled, but this seems to have a slight blue or cyan cast to me.I will investigate this to see if I did something wrong during the profiling. Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/125" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 1/6" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Lens: Asahi Opt. Co. 135mm f/3.5 Takumar #3972XXMount: M42FFD: 45.46mmUV: ?Filter: 46mm Visible Light [f/11 for 1/100" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/125" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 1.6" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter]The focusing error in this UV photo is entirely my own. The 135/3.5 Takumar is a nicely sharp lens as can been seen in the Visible and IR photos above. I was attempting to block the M42/K-mount adapter light leak and joggled the rig, not realizing this until later. Ultraviolet Light [preceding photo over-saturated to show center/edge differences] Link to comment
Andrea B. Posted September 20, 2014 Author Share Posted September 20, 2014 The Asahi 85mm f/4.5 Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar is corrected in UV, Visible and IR wavelengths. So I thought it would be interesting to make a test of that. I focused on a fence post in Visible light using the Baader UV/IR-Cut Filter. Then I changed the filter to the B+W 093IR for the Infrared shot. After that the Baader UV-Pass filter was applied for the UV frame. No re-focusing was done after the filter changes. Visible Light [f/11 for 1/100" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with Baader UVIR-Block Filter] Infrared Light [f/11 for 1/250" @ ISO 160 in Sunlight with B+W 093 IR-Pass Filter] Ultraviolet Light [f/11 for 1.6" @ ISO 400 in Sunlight with Baader UV-Pass Filter] OLD: Unresized Extracts of the Preceding 3 Photos[uPDATE: I'm thinking that I might have not properly prepared these extracts with respect to equally applying sharpening/detail edits. So I'm going to add a new set below which I hope will be more objective.]From left to right: Ultraviolet, Visible, Infrared. NEW: Unresized Extracts of the Preceding 3 Photos The default Photo Ninja 'anti-aliasing' sharpening was used in each photo during conversion. For this composite, a subsequent gentle 2-pixel high pass overlay 'output' sharpening was applied to the two fenceposts in each photo to bring out the details a bit. The Details slider in PN was not used.I do think there is some focus shifting between the wavelengths. I wonder if this kind of focus shift would occur if working more closely with the UAT?Of course, another observation to be made with this added composite is that the Detail slider which was applied in the preceding composite (but unevenly) does make a whale of a difference in rendering details."-) Link to comment
Alex H Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 There is obvious focus shift in the last set, particularly between the visible and infrared.Your B+W 093 must be a lot thicker than both filters made by Baader? Link to comment
Andrea B. Posted September 21, 2014 Author Share Posted September 21, 2014 I think there is also a shift between the UV and Vis. The B+W 093 has a 2mm thickness. It reaches 88% transmission at 900nm.Reference: http://www.schneider...olor_Filter.pdf Interestingly, I cannot find the thicknesses of the Baader filters on the Baader Planetarium website.I'll keep looking. Added Later:The Astro-Physics shop gives 2mm as the thickness of ring-mounted 2" Baader filters.http://astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/baader/filters/baaderfilters So all filters were of the same thickness. This would be an interesting test to repeat. Link to comment
Andrea B. Posted September 21, 2014 Author Share Posted September 21, 2014 I myself have a BIG question about the UV results across the tested lens set. I profiled the K5 camera colour for each lens.I shot a white reflective standard for each lens.Each UV photo had the profiled white balance and K5 color applied for that lens. Then WHY do the UV false color results vary so widely across the set?Are all these lenses really recording UV so very differently??I guess so. For that matter the Visible color profiling is all over the map too.Sigh. Visible composite of the tested 35mm lenses. UV composite of the tested 35mm lenses. Visible (top) and UV(bottom) composite of the tested 50mm lenses. Visible (top) and UV(bottom) composite of the tested 'long' lenses. Link to comment
Andrea B. Posted September 21, 2014 Author Share Posted September 21, 2014 I have updated Post #6 above.I have added what I think is a better comparison of the UV/Vis/IR focus shift comparison for the UAT 85/4.5.Post Link: http://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/1031-field-test-m42-mount-infinity-visiruv/page__view__findpost__p__4516 Link to comment
Alex H Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Andrea, I would recommend you to take one lens, for example 3.5/35 Kyoei/Kuribayashi and shoot the same scene at all apertures, process shot at F/3.5 your regular way and apply the same settings to the rest of the shots (F/5.6, F/8, F/11, F/16) and see what happens. Link to comment
Andrea B. Posted September 26, 2014 Author Share Posted September 26, 2014 Thanks, Alex. A very good suggestion. And I need to get offline for awhile, too. :D **************** EDITOR's NOTE: I split off the discussion here about profiling in Photo Ninja to its own thread:Discussion of Profiling in Photo Ninja for UV Photos See also the old thread about this:Photo Ninja: Colour Correction: Light Source Tab Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now