• Ultraviolet Photography
  •  

Like Meyer Trioplan ... but so much cooler

Infrared Multispectral UV Camera UV Lens SWIR
21 replies to this topic

#1 SteveCampbell

    Member

  • Members
  • 141 posts
  • Location: Australia

Posted 30 August 2018 - 07:28

The Meyer Trioplan 2.8/100 is expensive because it makes pretty bubble bokeh, but is far too expensive for me.

I took the much cheaper Pentacon 2.8/150 medium-format slide projector triplet lens (a rebranding of the Meyer Diaplan 2.8/150) and mounted it to a helicoid mounted to a tilt-shift adapter on my full-spectrum modified 5Dmk2. Due to the large medium-format image circle it tolerates tilt-shift well. Brief tests showed it approx -2/3EV vs the Steinheil Cassar 2.8/50 in ultraviolet. I was getting 1/100th to 1/160th earlier in the day (at ISO3200).

Pentacon 2.8/150 + 62.5mm->M65 adapter + M65 chinese heliciod + M65->Pentacon Six adapter + Tilt-shift adapter [Pentacon Six->EF] + Full-spectrum Canon 5D mark II

Since the lens has an extremely similar optical design to the Trioplan, it produces the classic meyer bubble bokeh and triplet highlight glow. Of course, because it's 2.8/150 rather than 2.8/100, the bubble-bokeh is much larger. Although the photos appear to be soft, the lens actually retains detail remarkably well on close inspection, even on full-tilt. I've never heard of someone mounting a Pentacon/Meyer 2.8/150 to a tilt-shift adapter before - maybe this a noteworthy discovery.

Posted Image

Tests with minimal adjustments:

Ultraviolet [77mm BG-39 + UG-11]. Slow shutter speed here - it was evening so I didn't have much UV to work with, especially under the trees. 1/15th at ISO3200.

Posted Image

Wild cockatoo that tolerated me after some patience. Full-spectrum. Bubbles and triplet highlight glow.
Posted Image

Posted Image

Highlighting the tilt-shift a little more (full-spectrum):

Posted Image

Posted Image

These were just super-quick tests. Hopefully once I get some time I'll take some proper photos to post. Yes, there is dust on my sensor.

Edit: Bonus bubbles - full spectrum at night (also bonus sensor dust)

Posted Image

Edited by SteveCampbell, 30 August 2018 - 11:07.

STEVE CAMPBELL
DeviantArt | 500px | Tumblr

#2 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,847 posts

Posted 30 August 2018 - 07:58

So... this is what it looked like before you swapped the red and blue channels of the UV shot?
I just wish people would point that sort of thing out for those who are not aware when they are swapping UV.
Even IR, although, it is much more common and maybe obvious with IR, such as red/blue swapped 590nm.
Just saying, you UV swapper people should note that in your specifications, right up front, if you ask me, that you are swapping red/blue.
It is just as important to note that you are swapping channels as it is to note settings or filters or lenses, otherwise your going to confuse some people.
Attached Image: swap_UG11_whatever.jpg

Edited by Cadmium, 30 August 2018 - 08:14.


#3 SteveCampbell

    Member

  • Members
  • 141 posts
  • Location: Australia

Posted 30 August 2018 - 08:19

View PostCadmium, on 30 August 2018 - 07:58, said:

So... this is what it looked like before you swapped the red and blue channels of the UV shot?
I just wish people would point that sort of thing out for those who are not aware when they are swapping UV.
Even IR, although, it is much more common and maybe obvious with IR, such as red/blue swapped 590nm.
Just saying, you UV swapper people should note that in your specifications, right up front, if you ask me, that you are swapping red/blue.
It is just as important to note that you are swapping channels as it is to note settings or filters or lenses, otherwise your going to confuse some people.
Attachment swap_UG11_whatever.jpg

Hi Cadmium - I didn't swap the channels. I white-balanced using a photo of the same scene, and the result is the photo I posted. The white balance shown is typical of my camera with that filter combination, even when white-balanced with PFTE.
STEVE CAMPBELL
DeviantArt | 500px | Tumblr

#4 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,847 posts

Posted 30 August 2018 - 08:25

Well, that is definitely peculiar.
I think I will let someone else explain that then, because it makes absolutely no sense to me.

Edited by Cadmium, 30 August 2018 - 08:26.


#5 SteveCampbell

    Member

  • Members
  • 141 posts
  • Location: Australia

Posted 30 August 2018 - 08:32

View PostCadmium, on 30 August 2018 - 08:25, said:

Well, that is definitely peculiar.
I think I will let someone else explain that then, because it makes absolutely no sense to me.

I'm not sure how other people with converted 5D mark IIs find their white balance. If it's a camera-model effect, I would assume it's either due to the bayer-array composition, or idiosyncrasies with the whitebalance software.

I shoot RAW+JPG - here's the unaltered out-of-camera JPG for the sake of curiosity: [link]
STEVE CAMPBELL
DeviantArt | 500px | Tumblr

#6 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,847 posts

Posted 30 August 2018 - 08:55

Steve, I have never ever seen any UV shots that are red, unless they are red/blue swapped.
Someone else will need to explain this.

#7 JMC

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 789 posts
  • Location: London, UK

Posted 30 August 2018 - 09:00

Very cool indeed. The Raf Camera adapters are great for this type of build. Looks to have good UV transmission as well if only -2/3EV different to the Cassar 50mm

#8 SteveCampbell

    Member

  • Members
  • 141 posts
  • Location: Australia

Posted 30 August 2018 - 09:10

View PostJMC, on 30 August 2018 - 09:00, said:

Very cool indeed. The Raf Camera adapters are great for this type of build. Looks to have good UV transmission as well if only -2/3EV different to the Cassar 50mm

I feel like that guy almost single-handedly made atypical lenses viable on modern cameras. Impressive work with those adapters.

Edited by SteveCampbell, 30 August 2018 - 09:59.

STEVE CAMPBELL
DeviantArt | 500px | Tumblr

#9 nfoto

    Former Fierce Bear of the North

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 2,356 posts
  • Location: Sørumsand, Norway

Posted 30 August 2018 - 12:18

View PostCadmium, on 30 August 2018 - 08:55, said:

Steve, I have never ever seen any UV shots that are red, unless they are red/blue swapped.
Someone else will need to explain this.

I got a lot of these reddish UV shots with the early Nikons. No channel swapping.

Here with a modified D1X and the UV-Nikkor.

Attached Images

  • Attached Image: B0107010780.jpg


#10 SteveCampbell

    Member

  • Members
  • 141 posts
  • Location: Australia

Posted 30 August 2018 - 12:23

View Postnfoto, on 30 August 2018 - 12:18, said:

I got a lot of these reddish UV shots with the early Nikons. No channel swapping.

Here with a modified D1X and the UV-Nikkor.

This is so amazingly aerochrome-like...
STEVE CAMPBELL
DeviantArt | 500px | Tumblr

#11 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 7,405 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 30 August 2018 - 13:05

What a cool exploration of an unusual lens - thanks, Steve.
All kinds of interesting effects from this Pentacon to play with, aren't there?

That cheeky Cockatoo is very sweet. The first Cockatoo photo might have been an exploratory photo, but could be a keeper? (A touch of contrast enhancement?)

If you read the EXIF in one of the photos, then you can find what the white balance multipliers are. That would perhaps give some insight into the white balance effect seen from this Canon.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#12 SteveCampbell

    Member

  • Members
  • 141 posts
  • Location: Australia

Posted 30 August 2018 - 13:27

View PostAndrea B., on 30 August 2018 - 13:05, said:

What a cool exploration of an unusual lens - thanks, Steve.
All kinds of interesting effects from this Pentacon to play with, aren't there?

That cheeky Cockatoo is very sweet. The first Cockatoo photo might have been an exploratory photo, but could be a keeper? (A touch of contrast enhancement?)

If you read the EXIF in one of the photos, then you can find what the white balance multipliers are. That would perhaps give some insight into the white balance effect seen from this Canon.

Glad you enjoyed it! Lots of potential for this lens, especially after a couple modifications - (1) removing some tubing to allow easier infinity (2) adapting a filter ring for easier UV use. It's such an extreme example of triplet optics that you wouldn't find anywhere but a projection lens. Even the Trioplan 2.8/100 was considered pushing the boundaries of good taste at the time of it's production, from what I understand!

I might revisit some of these photos for proper editing in a bit, although I'll admit I'm somewhat more fond of the second cockatoo photo! Always a pleasant surprise when you manage to capture motion in manual focus.
STEVE CAMPBELL
DeviantArt | 500px | Tumblr

#13 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,847 posts

Posted 31 August 2018 - 05:12

View Postnfoto, on 30 August 2018 - 12:18, said:

I got a lot of these reddish UV shots with the early Nikons. No channel swapping. Here with a modified D1X and the UV-Nikkor.

Yes, I have seen your red landscape photo on your website, many years ago.
http://www.naturfoto..._rev00.html#top

That shot has always been inspiring, but I have never seen any UV-only photo that has red in it when optimally white balanced, and even when using altered white balance I have not captured such an image.
Your photo says you used a Nikon FF filter + a Tiffen Hot Mirror filter.
I am not sure of the FF graph transmission, but the Hot Mirror cuts off around 750nm+, so if the FF transmits Red/IR, then the Hot Mirror is leaking a fair amount of red/IR.
https://www.zgc.com/...jpg?OpenElement
Thus, your photo is not what I would call UV-only.
It also sounds like you are implying on your website, that that photo is a mix of UV and IR:

"Dreamlike landscapes are at your fingertips, simply by using a combination of UV and IR imaging with your digital camera. When UV and IR both contribute,
the resulting image takes on an eerie quality entirely of its own, unique to the digital domain. I have tried, in vain, to duplicate such shots with colour IR film.
Nikon D1, 105 mm f/4.5 UV-Nikkor + Sankor Anamorphic lens, Nikon FF + Tiffen Hot-Mirror filters. "

So, perhaps Steve's photo/filter are a mix of UV+Red/IR, even though the filters he is using would lead us to believe they are suppressing the Red/IR of the UG11,
because actual BG39 should be suppressing the Red/IR from an actual UG11.
Pure UV-only should not produce red images.

Edited by Cadmium, 31 August 2018 - 07:09.


#14 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,847 posts

Posted 31 August 2018 - 07:10

Added:
Not sure you mean the filter that came with the UV-Nikkor when you say Nikon FF filter.
I looked up "Nikon FF filter", and I get all sorts of different kinds of filters that are not at all UV Bandpass filters,
but here is the graph for the UV bandpass filter that came with the UV-Nikkor from the UV-Nikkor manual.
https://www.mir.com....nual_page12.jpg

Not exactly a perfect UV filter to use, even when stacking with the best of BG suppression, because it leaks visible violet above 400nm.
That being said, the real problem is stacking it with Tiffen Hot Mirror which transmits a lot of Red/IR.
When I see red in a "UV-Only" photo, I know there is something wrong, something more than just UV.

https://www.mir.com....Instruction.htm

Once again, it is a very lovely image, I have admired it from the first time I saw it, but it can't be UV-only, it isn't.

Edited by Cadmium, 31 August 2018 - 07:14.


#15 nfoto

    Former Fierce Bear of the North

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 2,356 posts
  • Location: Sørumsand, Norway

Posted 31 August 2018 - 09:41

In hindsight, no it isn't pure UV. But more UV than IR, look at the bright lake surface and the haze at distance.

It's pretty hard to get such images these days with currently available filtration and cameras.

#16 Andy Broomé

    Invisible Light Enthusiast

  • Members
  • 173 posts
  • Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Posted 01 September 2018 - 04:17

View PostSteveCampbell, on 30 August 2018 - 07:28, said:

The Meyer Trioplan 2.8/100 is expensive because it makes pretty bubble bokeh, but is far too expensive for me.
Some wonderful images, Steve, especially the cheeky bird.

I'm also looking to experiment with a Pentacon AV f/2.8 80mm projection lens. The one I got off of ebay had been converted to M42 mount, but had a 42mm filter mount as well, so I've been waiting on another ebay order for a 42mm to 52mm step up ring to test out the UV on it. Should be interesting!

#17 SteveCampbell

    Member

  • Members
  • 141 posts
  • Location: Australia

Posted 01 September 2018 - 05:16

View PostAndy Broomé, on 01 September 2018 - 04:17, said:

Some wonderful images, Steve, especially the cheeky bird.

I'm also looking to experiment with a Pentacon AV f/2.8 80mm projection lens. The one I got off of ebay had been converted to M42 mount, but had a 42mm filter mount as well, so I've been waiting on another ebay order for a 42mm to 52mm step up ring to test out the UV on it. Should be interesting!

Thanks Andy! I think you'll have fun with the AV 2.8/80. It has great potential as a portrait lens. I did a quick series of tests on some other projection and enlarger lenses that I'll post in a second
STEVE CAMPBELL
DeviantArt | 500px | Tumblr

#18 UlfW

    Ulf W

  • Members(+)
  • 789 posts
  • Location: Sweden, Malmö

Posted 01 September 2018 - 05:43

View PostSteveCampbell, on 30 August 2018 - 07:28, said:

Ultraviolet [77mm BG-39 + UG-11]. Slow shutter speed here - it was evening so I didn't have much UV to work with, especially under the trees. 1/15th at ISO3200.

The low UV-content might be the source of the strange colours.
Are the filters proper Schott filter glass from a really reliable source or just labeled "Real Schott filter glass"?
I suspect an IR-leakage in the stack, but then the "BG-39" would have to be a look-alike filter with less IR attenuation, as a proper BG39 would block IR better.

Some cheaper eBay sources, all over the world, not only China, are not fully correct with their material type declarations.
I fully trust Steve at UVIROptics using proper materials.
Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#19 SteveCampbell

    Member

  • Members
  • 141 posts
  • Location: Australia

Posted 01 September 2018 - 07:30

View PostUlfW, on 01 September 2018 - 05:43, said:



The low UV-content might be the source of the strange colours.
Are the filters proper Schott filter glass from a really reliable source or just labeled "Real Schott filter glass"?
I suspect an IR-leakage in the stack, but then the "BG-39" would have to be a look-alike filter with less IR attenuation, as a proper BG39 would block IR better.

Some cheaper eBay sources, all over the world, not only China, are not fully correct with their material type declarations.
I fully trust Steve at UVIROptics using proper materials.

I believe I bought mine from Image-Laboratory from Framingham, Massachusetts via eBay. I don't have a photospectrometer to provide spectral transmittance metrics, unfortunately. I would be willing to believe a rather minor IR leak to be a play here. It does add some artistic character, I must say.
STEVE CAMPBELL
DeviantArt | 500px | Tumblr

#20 UlfW

    Ulf W

  • Members(+)
  • 789 posts
  • Location: Sweden, Malmö

Posted 01 September 2018 - 10:00

View PostSteveCampbell, on 01 September 2018 - 07:30, said:

I believe I bought mine from Image-Laboratory from Framingham, Massachusetts via eBay.
That is what I suspected.

I have bought some filters from Image-Laboratory too, for less sensitive tasks.
The two filters ordered as "BG38", 52mm and 77mm, has a rather different transmission, neither close to the real Schott BG38 curve.
The "Real BG40" was close to one of the "BG38" above and more like a correct BG40.
Their eBay offerings are full of technical errors about UV-photography too.

If your "BG39" is something like a BG40 instead and the "UG11" behaves like a real UG11 you will have an OD3 IR leakage at 700nm.
I think that a stack transmission like that could give you that kind of image colours.

From an artistic point of view these UV+IR based images can be quite interesting and pleasing, by adding a new interesting dimension to the image.
Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.