• Ultraviolet Photography
  •  

Greetings from Portugal!

86 replies to this topic

#41 nfoto

    Former Fierce Bear of the North

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 2,310 posts
  • Location: Sørumsand, Norway

Posted 13 January 2019 - 11:41

Some of the cheap eBay adapter offerings are excellent, some are awful or not set at the correct flange distance. Exterior finish sometimes is a little rough. One simply has to try a couple of them and hope for the best. Roxsen/Fotasy adapter have in general been fine, by the way and they are not among the more expensive alternatives.

#42 Terry

    Member

  • Members
  • 67 posts
  • Location: Auckland

Posted 13 January 2019 - 11:41

I cant comment on the more expensive adapters as I dont have one for the UV. I bought an ebay Fotasy M42/NEX adapter which is ok but I'm sure there are better as this is not fantastic. You can feel a bit of play in the helicoid. I do have a Vello EF to NEX booster adapter with optics and its definitely much better but then so is the price.

I dont think it makes much difference seeing as there are no optics involved and they are relatively inexpensive - I think I paid $30 for mine.

and it was recommended to me to go M39 to M42 adapter ring - M42 Helicoid to NEX (as you said, I dont think there is an M39 to NEX adapter)
Terry
Sony @5000 - Kolari Vision UV bandpass filter
Sony and Minolta lenses

#43 JCDowdy

    JCDowdy

  • Members
  • 1,158 posts
  • Location: Arlington, TN

Posted 13 January 2019 - 22:29

Are you using the Fotasy Slim 1mm M42/NEX adapter?

If not I recommend you consider one in combination with the longest 35-90mm helicoid.
The 80mm and 90mm EL-Nikkors will still take considerable additional length of simple M42 extension tube and still focus INF. Such a combo will focus from INF well into >1:1 macro magnification. To me the longer helicoids seem to have less play when used in the shorter end of the extension range.

Also when using the M39 to M42 thread ring be sure to orient the notches facing away from the lens in case rough threads get stuck......

#44 Terry

    Member

  • Members
  • 67 posts
  • Location: Auckland

Posted 14 January 2019 - 04:15

View PostJCDowdy, on 13 January 2019 - 22:29, said:

Are you using the Fotasy Slim 1mm M42/NEX adapter?

If not I recommend you consider one in combination with the longest 35-90mm helicoid.
The 80mm and 90mm EL-Nikkors will still take considerable additional length of simple M42 extension tube and still focus INF. Such a combo will focus from INF well into >1:1 macro magnification. To me the longer helicoids seem to have less play when used in the shorter end of the extension range.

Also when using the M39 to M42 thread ring be sure to orient the notches facing away from the lens in case rough threads get stuck......

I'm using the std 1 inch model along with the 35-90mm helicoid and it seems to be ok.
Good point about the M39/M42 adapter ring, thanks :)
Terry
Sony @5000 - Kolari Vision UV bandpass filter
Sony and Minolta lenses

#45 JCDowdy

    JCDowdy

  • Members
  • 1,158 posts
  • Location: Arlington, TN

Posted 14 January 2019 - 17:09

View PostTerry, on 14 January 2019 - 04:15, said:

I'm using the std 1 inch model along with the 35-90mm helicoid and it seems to be ok.

Will the 80mm EL-Nikkor focus to INF on that? By my calculations it should be about 10.46mm to long for the 80mm. Hey, if you are OK with that then all is well!

Also I misspoke above where I said "The 80mm and 90mm EL-Nikkors will still take...." I meant to say "The 80mm and 105mm EL-Nikkors will still take...." I had FFD on the brain and the 105mm EL-Nikkor has a FFD of 90mm.

Edited by JCDowdy, 14 January 2019 - 18:50.


#46 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 7,184 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 15 January 2019 - 17:38

...be sure to orient the notches facing away from the lens in case rough threads get stuck

Why do I *never* remember to do this? :lol:

I also have observed, perhaps strangely?, that when the M39/M42 thread changer notches face the mount end of lens, that it almost always seems to help keep the aperture marks topmost for enlarger lenses. Trying to adjust aperture in the field when those marks are facing downward is not fun.

I could remedy my misadventures with the M39/M42 changers by buying a big lot of them and assigning them permanently to the various lenses which require them. I started doing this, but got sidetracked and never completed the task.

P.S. I was so "girl dumb" when I started this UV photography adventure 12 years ago, that I had no idea what those notches were for!!! Fortunately, I am teachable and soon learned. :D :D :rolleyes: Now I actually own 3 or 4 of those nifty little notch wrench thingies. An invaluable tool for anyone wanting to dismantle lenses. Or unscrew stuck M39/M42 changers.




I dont think there is an M39 to NEX adapter

I have a Fotodiox PRO Leica M39 to NEX adapter. Is that the same M39? Will go look up.
But I think it is perhaps easier to find M42-to-anything adapters.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#47 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 7,184 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 15 January 2019 - 17:55

Ulf: The mirrorless Canon EOS M-series are APS-C.

Thank you! I was away too long and must have forgotten how to Fact Check. I added a correction that EOS-R is FF and EOS-M is APS-C.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#48 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 7,184 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 15 January 2019 - 18:07

In answer to my own question.

The Fotodiox PRO Leica M39 to NEX adapter which I have is for an M39 x 26tpi lens.

And Wikipedia states that most EL-Nikkors "feature 39mm Leica thread mounts".

There are some M39 x 1 lenses also. I think Canon had some, for example. (Not sure about that.)
My Kyoei 135/3.5 Super-Acall is an M39x1. So is my UV-Planar which is an enlarger lens type.

The M39/M42 changer seems to work on either M39 x 26tpi or M39 x 1. That's interesting.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#49 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 7,184 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 15 January 2019 - 18:26

Well I am rambling on today, but I have another little bit of information about that Fotodiox M39 x 26tpi to NEX adapter.

I tried the UV-Planar M39 x 1 with the M39 x 26tpi adapter, and the lens could be partially screwed into the adapter. (Do.NOT.Force.)

Whether or not that would prove useful depends of course on a particular lens's flange focal distance (FFD). I doubt that any M39 x 1 lens is going to have the typical Leica M39 x 26tpi FFD of 28.8 mm. :D
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#50 ACRosalino

    Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts
  • Location: Portugal

Posted 22 January 2019 - 05:51

Meanwhile, I have managed to grab a few relatively cheap lenses, for experimenting with UV imaging and I have ordered already a few adapters, to convert them all to M42 mount and to 52mm filter threads...now, a few additional questions come to mind:

* what is the best way to use just one Baader-U 2" filter on the various lenses? Is there an "easy filter swap" solution, for a reasonable price?
Such solution should also allow to easily shoot Visual-->UV-->IR frames, using various other filters, without disturbing the camera pointing and focusing...

* how can I use a lens shade/hood on these lenses? I am not sure how to fit one, when using 2"/M48 astronomy UV filter, mounted on some kind of adapter, so that it can fit on a 52mm filter ring on the lenses - but I am sure someone here has found a working solution, also for this?

Thanks in advance for your comments/advice on those 2 beginner's questions :-)
António C. Rosalino
Some UV permeable old glass: EL-Nikkor "metallic" 80mm & 105mm f/5.6, Steinheil Cassar-S 50mm f/2.8, Auto Exaktar 35mm f/2.8
Some UV lights: 2x Canon Speedlite 199A, waiting to be modified; No UV sensitive camera, no UV filter, no UV photos... yet.

#51 UlfW

    Ulf W

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

Posted 22 January 2019 - 07:34

View PostACRosalino, on 22 January 2019 - 05:51, said:

* what is the best way to use just one Baader-U 2" filter on the various lenses? Is there an "easy filter swap" solution, for a reasonable price?
Such solution should also allow to easily shoot Visual-->UV-->IR frames, using various other filters, without disturbing the camera pointing and focusing...

* how can I use a lens shade/hood on these lenses? I am not sure how to fit one, when using 2"/M48 astronomy UV filter, mounted on some kind of adapter, so that it can fit on a 52mm filter ring on the lenses - but I am sure someone here has found a working solution, also for this?


Hi António,

I like your lens selection and have all of them myself. My favourite is the 80mm EL-Nikkor old metal version.

I relocated my Baader U filter glass into a pair of 48-52mm step rings to get a 52mm filter cell with threads both at front and rear end.
There are other ways to do that, or you could just place such up and down-rings on the Baader 2" filter cell.
https://www.ebay.com...=p2045573.m1684

I do a lot of filter swapping during my photo sessions and have a solution that works well for me.
When possible I adapt the filter thread size on the lens to a 52mm thread with suitable step-rings.

For an "easy filter swap" solution I use a Xume lens adapter on the lens and matching Xume filter adapters on each filter.
https://www.ebay.com...ter+52&_sacat=0
If your setup is sturdy enough the cameras pointing direction will not be disturbed when swapping filters.
For VIS-NIR I do the same with 77mm adapters om my normal Canon EOS-lenses and big filters. It saves much time when swapping filters.

Your EL-Nikkor lenses has an on odd filter thread, 34.5mm x 0.5mm and the fitting step rings are not China-cheap:
https://www.ebay.com...aon-q:rk:2:pf:0
As an alternative you could permanently glue a 34mm - 52mm step ring on the lens or try to place some suitably thin spacer materials between the 34mm and 34.5mm threads.
That worked well for me when I was waiting for the proper ring to arrive.

Edited by UlfW, 22 January 2019 - 07:39.

Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#52 ACRosalino

    Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts
  • Location: Portugal

Posted 22 January 2019 - 15:14

Thanks for the help, Ulf: I have ordered two of those Russian made M39.5x0.5M-->M52x0.75F adapters, which will kind of standardize my EL-Nikkors
(I will deal with the Steinheils later - I am not sure yet which filter threads they use, but that should be easier to deal with).

If I understood you correctly, the 2" M48 Baader-U will work fine with the common and cheap M48-M52 step up adapters, which I believe use 52mmx0.75mm threads? If that is the case, I will likely sandwich it between 2 of those adapters, just like you did.

The Xume magnetic adapters seem to be what I am looking for: so, I will need one magnetic adapter for each one of my lenses... and just a single magnetic adapter for the Baader-U (for its 52mmx0.75mm adapter, really) - do I get it right?

Also, since the exposed/front side of the Baader-U will also have been adapted to M52mmx0.75mm, I suppose will be able to use a lens shade/hood on this adapter?

And maybe even some kind of lens cover, which fits on top of that shade/hood?

Making a "normal" lens out of those EL-Nikkors is more work than I had anticipated... and all these different threads/pitches are a true nightmare!

Edited by ACRosalino, 22 January 2019 - 15:15.

António C. Rosalino
Some UV permeable old glass: EL-Nikkor "metallic" 80mm & 105mm f/5.6, Steinheil Cassar-S 50mm f/2.8, Auto Exaktar 35mm f/2.8
Some UV lights: 2x Canon Speedlite 199A, waiting to be modified; No UV sensitive camera, no UV filter, no UV photos... yet.

#53 UlfW

    Ulf W

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

Posted 22 January 2019 - 18:13

[quote name='ACRosalino' timestamp='1548170064' post='25685']
(I will deal with the Steinheils later - I am not sure yet which filter threads they use, but that should be easier to deal with).
[/quote]
My Steinheil Cassar-S 50mm has a 40.5mm filter thread You'll need a 40.5-52mm step up ring.

[quote name='ACRosalino' timestamp='1548170064' post='25685']
If I understood you correctly, the 2" M48 Baader-U will work fine with the common and cheap [i]M48-M52 step up adapters[/i], which I believe use 52mmx0.75mm threads? If that is the case, I will likely sandwich it between 2 of those adapters, just like you did.

Also, since the exposed/front side of the Baader-U will also have been adapted to M52mmx0.75mm, I suppose will be able to use a[i] lens shade/hood[/i] on this adapter?
And maybe even some kind of lens cover, which fits on top of that shade/hood?
[/quote]

For the Baader U filter cell you can use cheap step-up and step-down rings 48-52 and 52-48.
I thought that combination was too long and relocated the filter glass from the thin-walled Baader filter cell.
I do not remember exactly how and cannot check as the parts are under the edge label I added.
I think I used step-up and step-down rings 48-52 and 52-48 plus the M48 retaining ring from the Baader filter cell.

It will be possible to use a m52 threaded lens shade there.

[quote name='ACRosalino' timestamp='1548170064' post='25685']
The [i]Xume magnetic adapter[/i]s seem to be what I am looking for: so, I will need one magnetic adapter for each one of my lenses... and just a single magnetic adapter for the Baader-U (for its 52mmx0.75mm adapter, really) - do I get it right?
[/quote]

For a full spectrum modified camera you'll need at least two filters and filter adapters. One for UV, like the Baader U and one to restore the filtering of IR that will be removed during the conversion of the camera to full spectrum.
Then you will be able to take normal VIS images too.
I would recommend a BG38 or BG40, 2mm Ø52mm for that.

For IR you can use different types of IR-pass filters, depending on what you are aiming for.
Above 760nm you get monochrome images as the three colour channels have very similar sensitivity.

If you like to experiment with other types of filter-stacks with UV as a part of the recorded spectrum I would recommend a S8612, 2mm thick filter.

[quote name='ACRosalino' timestamp='1548170064' post='25685']
Making a "normal" lens out of those EL-Nikkors is more work than I had anticipated... and all these different threads/pitches are a true nightmare![color=#282828] [/color]
[/quote]
You need some way to adjust the focus too:
[url="http://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php/topic/2396-long-focusing-helicoid-for-small-lenses/page__view__findpost__p__17389"]http://www.ultraviol...dpost__p__17389[/url]
Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#54 JCDowdy

    JCDowdy

  • Members
  • 1,158 posts
  • Location: Arlington, TN

Posted 22 January 2019 - 19:52

There is a lot of content on this site, here is a very good filter quick release filter attachment method from several years back.

http://www.ultraviol...27-inside-tips/


B)

Edited by JCDowdy, 22 January 2019 - 19:52.


#55 ACRosalino

    Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts
  • Location: Portugal

Posted 23 January 2019 - 00:04

Thank you, Ulf: I just ordered a couple of 40,5mm to 52mm step up adapters, in order to also "standardize" the 50mm Cassar-S and Cassaron filter threads.
And I also ordered the 52mm-48mm and 48mm-52mm adapters, in order to sandwich the 2" Baader-U, when I finally find the courage to purchase one :-)
Also selected a few M42-M42 helicoid focusers of various sizes, in order to be able to focus the 2 EL-Nikkors: I think that, step by step, the pieces of the puzzle are beginning to make sense!

Regarding visual and IR use of the full spectrum Canon EOS-M, my first idea was to continue to use Baader filters... maybe because I have been using those for astro-imaging, with decent results:

* they have a 2" UV/IR Cut filter, blocking UV below 400nm and IR above 680nm - would that be appropriate for visual imaging?
* they also have a 2" IR-Pass-Filter, 685nm - would that be appropriate for IR imaging?

In any case, I will try to learn more about the filters you have mentioned (BG38, BG40, S8612), especially since the Baaders are not exactly cheap.


Also thanking you for the content link, John: it is good to know there is an alternative to the magnetic adapters - only it was not clear for me if those Nikon extension rings K will work only with Nikon lenses... or if they can be adapted to any lens with a standard 52mm filter thread?

Edited by ACRosalino, 23 January 2019 - 01:01.

António C. Rosalino
Some UV permeable old glass: EL-Nikkor "metallic" 80mm & 105mm f/5.6, Steinheil Cassar-S 50mm f/2.8, Auto Exaktar 35mm f/2.8
Some UV lights: 2x Canon Speedlite 199A, waiting to be modified; No UV sensitive camera, no UV filter, no UV photos... yet.

#56 UlfW

    Ulf W

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

Posted 23 January 2019 - 04:54

View PostACRosalino, on 23 January 2019 - 00:04, said:

Regarding visual and IR use of the full spectrum Canon EOS-M, my first idea was to continue to use Baader filters... maybe because I have been using those for astro-imaging, with decent results:

* they have a 2" UV/IR Cut filter, blocking UV below 400nm and IR above 680nm - would that be appropriate for visual imaging?
* they also have a 2" IR-Pass-Filter, 685nm - would that be appropriate for IR imaging?

In any case, I will try to learn more about the filters you have mentioned (BG38, BG40, S8612), especially since the Baaders are not exactly cheap.


I'm sure the Baader filters are of excellent optical quality. The UV/IR cut filter however lack one thing. It do not restore the characteristic of the cameras original blue-green colour-shaping filter that is removed during conversion.
Of the two filters I removed when I converted my EOS 60D the BG-filter appears to be the most important to replace for a decent colour balance for VIS images.
http://www.ultraviol...dpost__p__17625

One of our members, Cadmium has a company that is making and selling specialised filters like BG38, BG40, S8612 and many other.
I have always been pleased with the filters I bought from him.
https://www.ebay.com...=p2047675.l2562

For IR -pass filters I have used filters from Zomei.
https://www.ebay.com...0&_nkw=zomei+IR
They are a Chinese company with reasonably good quality of their filters and have a range of filters for IR-pass.
So far I have not seen any problem with those filters and have both 77mm and 52mm versions.
The 77mm versions fitting my wide angle EOS-lenses, for NIR landscape photography.

You might want to explore both pure NIR (>780nm) and cut on wavelengths closer to VIS getting some faint colour variations due to the bayer channel sensitivity variations near at 680-780nm
A filter for simulation of the old Kodak AIR IR- colour film might also be interesting. Then you need an orange filter.

I have been playing around with most normal sharp cut filters filters for IR imagery and if I should select a few of them I would get these:
one with a cut-on at 530nm - 550nm for AIR
one with a cut-on at 590nm for Goldie images, search for "Goldie IR image" on the net.
one with a cut-on at 650nm - 700nm for almost NIR with colours
one with a cut-on at 780nm - 850nm for pure NIR, monochrome

Edited by UlfW, 23 January 2019 - 04:57.

Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#57 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,602 posts

Posted 23 January 2019 - 09:28

View PostUlfW, on 23 January 2019 - 04:54, said:

For IR -pass filters I have used filters from Zomei.
https://www.ebay.com...0&_nkw=zomei+IR

I think the key phrase there is "From China", and certainly they are, and without any good data for inclusion in other stacks or such.
not a good idea, certainly NOT Schott or Hoya glass.
Good science starts with good data.

"I have been playing around with most normal sharp cut filters filters for IR imagery and if I should select a few of them I would get these"
Please show us how these are any sharper cutoff than Schott.
You even have a USB, right? Do you have comparisons?
I await your comparisons.

Edited by Cadmium, 23 January 2019 - 09:39.


#58 UlfW

    Ulf W

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

Posted 23 January 2019 - 11:13

View PostCadmium, on 23 January 2019 - 09:28, said:

I think the key phrase there is "From China", and certainly they are, and without any good data for inclusion in other stacks or such.
not a good idea, certainly NOT Schott or Hoya glass.
Good science starts with good data.

I strongly agree that "Good science starts with good data"!!

But not all from China must be bad by default.
I do not have any Schott or Hoya filter for NIR for the direct comparison.
If you like to send me some suitable glass for testing, I'll happily do that comparison, but I do not want to buy any more IR-filters just now as I am satisfied with the Zomei IR-filters for now.

When I compared the cutoff steepness for the Zomei IR-filters with all my VIS B+W filters, 022, 040, 041, 090, 091, with cutoffs furter into VIS, (based on Schott-glass), the Zomei filter's cutoff and IR-transmission behave very similar, but with different cutoff wavelengths.

I am quite experienced in looking for surface flatness, dimples and striations in optical components and have inspected the Zomei filters very carefully without finding any flaws visible to the naked eye.
The images they produce are also sharp. The wavelength designations are likely not that well correlated to the cutoff point and for real scientific work it should be verified with a spectrometer.

IMHO Zomei IR-filters hold a reasonable quality level and work well enough for non scientific photography, even if they are produced in China.

When you compare cutoff steepness the American Tiffen filters like the proper filter for AIR, Tiffen 12 are less steep than the glass from Schott.
It might be intentional.
I do not think this steeness is very important for our type of photography as the final false colour result is affected very much by the post processing.

View PostCadmium, on 23 January 2019 - 09:28, said:

"I have been playing around with most normal sharp cut filters filters for IR imagery and if I should select a few of them I would get these"
Please show us how these are any sharper cutoff than Schott.
You even have a USB, right? Do you have comparisons?
I await your comparisons.

Sorry I do not understand what I shall compare here.
I just gave a set of suitable cutoff wavelengths for what I think would be usable for different types of IR-photo.
My first choice would be Schott glass based filters

Sometimes you can find filters with such cutoffs made for quality brands like Schneider (B+W).
They use Schott glass, but not all types are available anymore.
The B+W 023 530nm is not produced anymore and if that cutoff is desired it must be obtained elsewhere.

Sometimes the best source for filters are good specialist companies like UVIROptics. ;-)

For 680nm and 850nm filters Zomei works well for me.

Edited by UlfW, 23 January 2019 - 11:17.

Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#59 Reed F. Curry

    Member

  • Members
  • 333 posts
  • Location: New Hampshire, USA

Posted 23 January 2019 - 21:55

View PostUlfW, on 23 January 2019 - 11:13, said:


Sometimes the best source for filters are good specialist companies like UVIROptics. ;-)

And sometimes the specialist company is UVROptics. ;-)

Antonio,
In contrast to the BaaderU, perhaps getting a UV-bandpass filter that is optimized for the UVA wavelengths, including the photon-dense range of 370-400nm might be a better bet. For that the new SEU Gen3 from UVROptics is the only game in town. The BaaderU blocks much of the long-wavelength UV, because it is based upon the Schott UG11 type of glass. The SEU Gen3 manages the UV wavelengths through two dichroic coated Boroflot glass elements. The Gen3 costs $100.00 less than the BaaderU, is a true 52mm, not 48mm, and comes with a 52mm lens hood and two anodized aluminum stacking caps. We just finalized the Gen3 last week and have found it to be faster than the Gen2, which was faster than the BaaderU.
Best regards,
Reed
http://www.uvroptics.com

#60 ACRosalino

    Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts
  • Location: Portugal

Posted 23 January 2019 - 22:06

I confess I am still confused as to which is the best filter to restore "normal" colors on a full spectrum camera: from what I have read here, it seems results will vary, depending on each camera's CMOS sensor and the (now removed) filter package that was factory installed?

These B38, B40, S8612 or Baader UV/IR are relatively expensive (around 100 Euro) and, if best results cannot be guarantee without experimentation first with a few of these filters - maybe the wisest solution will be to just get another camera body and use it, unmodified? After all, another EOS-M costs pretty much the same as a single Baader UV/IR filter!

Of course, if you are shooting with an expensive full spectrum camera, it is another story...
António C. Rosalino
Some UV permeable old glass: EL-Nikkor "metallic" 80mm & 105mm f/5.6, Steinheil Cassar-S 50mm f/2.8, Auto Exaktar 35mm f/2.8
Some UV lights: 2x Canon Speedlite 199A, waiting to be modified; No UV sensitive camera, no UV filter, no UV photos... yet.