Nikon Z6/Z7 as a UV/IR Conversion: the Bad News

[dabateman]

You will have to call Dennis Moore, to clear all those lupins.

 

 

[Cadmium]

https://petapixel.com/2019/06/17/nikon-confirms-d5-equivalent-top-tier-mirrorless-camera-coming/

[Cadmium]

Birna, Those last few look red, did you get your IR Chrome working, or something else?

[nfoto]

The Kolari IRChrome is just a waste of money. I used the O56 filters instead.

[Cadmium]

OK, well those look so much more red, especially the Lupines shot.

[nfoto]

Oh, sorry, misunderstood what images the reference was for. The lupines were done with the Baader U.

[Cadmium]

OK, I wasn't thinking from that direction, now it makes more sense. Thanks.

[nfoto]

I got a full package of shims for the F/Z mounts from my friendly Nikon repair tech. Will start by adjusting the camera mount to bring the register distance hopefully within specification. There is, however, just so much which can be achieved by adding shims and still have native Z-lenses and/or the FTZ operative with full communication. Thus I expect to be forced into shimming some of the particular adapters as well, principally the RF(S)-Z adapter plus Leica L-Z.

[Cadmium]

Birna, I am glad you know how to do all of that.

Most people don't.

It seems worrisome that LifePixel would send you a camera with such problems.

In fact, that seems even more worrisome than the IR Chrome looking orange.

[nfoto]

My IRChrome filter looks strongly blue ...

[dabateman]

Birna,

I think Cadmium doesn't mean the filter its self rather the photos as a result of using the filter.

Andy's recent post is more intriguing. Using a double band filter. Could be a good mk2 version in the future. But sounds expensive.

[nfoto]

Turned out I could not shim the camera bayonet more than 0.1mm and still keeping the signal communication between lens and camera active. Any more and I lost communication to native Z lenses.

 

With the Z6 "updated" by 0.1mm shims in its bayonet, I then embarked on the task of adjusting lens adapters. My RF(S)-Z adapter (Fotasy by Roxsen), which is spot-on on the stock Z6 and Z7, needed 0.5mm shims to bring most lenses into acceptable focus to infinity and not further than that. Thus the register mismatch on the LifePixel-converted Z6 is at least 0.6mm, which as far as register distances go is massively out of alignment. I have no idea why they did this -- sloppiness in processing the camera and/or no QC at all?

 

I shall reserve a special FTZ adapter for the modified Z6 since the extra 0.5mm worth of shims to it will make it unusable on any stock Z body. At present not certain I can add that much of shims without breaking the signal pathway to CPU-capable F-mount lenses. Perhaps I have to add shims separately to front and rear mounts so as not to break communication. Contact pin placement on the F-mount lenses is maybe better suited to the large register adjustments necessary. I'll take a much needed coffee break now. Will soldier on later tonight.

[nfoto]

Later today, I did one of my FTZ adapters to be dedicated to the modified Z6. After "some" tweaking, I managed to get an acceptable 0.5mm shim implemented. This kept the signal but broke the minimum aperture trigger thus the camera loudly complained that the lens wasn't locked to the minimum aperture and refused to release the shutter. Simple solution was to depress the sensing trigger in the "ON" position and lock it with a bit of a toothpick. Add some epoxy glue, and no more error. The fit to the contact pins is precarious though, so a lens with lots of play in the mount should be tightened up otherwise the signal might break.

 

On the trip commencing tomorrow, I'll rely heavily on Z cameras: Z7 for macro, Z6 as the all-round documentary tool, and the modified Z6 for UV/IR/multispectral. I also have two AW1 and a housed Olympus EM1.2 for underwater stuff. Going all out mirrorless this time.

[Cadmium]

My IRChrome filter looks strongly blue ...

 

Yes, it looks blue, more like cerulean, perhaps? I meant the shots are orange foliage.

 

Any advice from Yann?

[nfoto]

Yes, it looks blue, more like cerulean, perhaps? I meant the shots are orange foliage.

 

OK, a small misunderstanding. The initial rendition of the Z6 files is more in the orange direction, which doesn't look very nice. However, a small w/b tweak brings the colours into better (or more pleasing) appearance.

 

Any advice from Yann?

 

Nope. In fact, Kolari didn't publish the filter comment I made. It is just stuck in the "awaits moderation" queue and most likely to stay there forever. I'm surprised if they publish any criticism of their product.

[nfoto]

At present I'm exploring IR capabilities of some of the rangefinder "S"-mount lenses. Cosina/Voigtländer made a small run of newly designed RF lenses around 2003-2004 and I purchased some of them. The 21mm f/4 became useful after I shimmed the camera (and lens adapter) to tackle the badly offset register distance introduced by Lifepixel when they modified my Z6.

 

 

Do note that in this case, even the efficient Topaz Debanding plugin could not perfectly remove all signs of striping

.

The 21/4, although surprisingly sharp, does show a discoloration or weak hot spot in IR, thus it's better applied to b/w style photography.

 

The old 8.5cm f/2 and the 10.5cm f/2.5 Nikkors behave very nicely in IR, though. Same goes for the 3.5cm f/3.5 W-Nikkor that has the added advantage of allowing a surprising amount of UV through it.

[dabateman]

I don't think Yann works for Kolari. Would be best to message him here.

[nfoto]

I lost all interest in his filter.

[Cadmium]

Birna, you are the only person I have seen show results with that filter, 'post-pre-order' that is, but I don't visit too many sites to check.

I would like to see your w/b tweak of that filter if ever you want.

[Andrea B.]

Birna gets my award for Most Inventive with Gear for her combinations of interesting old lenses, adapters, step rings and spacers. Of course she has long held my award for Most Interesting and Unusual UVIR Photographs. :D

 

QUESTION for Birna (who may be on a photo trek and temporarily out of range so I don't mind waiting): Why are you shimming the bayonet and not the sensor board?

 

Also, we both need to write to LifePixel about this problem.

[nfoto]

Just returned -- the cold and wet spring hasn't been very conducive to aquatic plant growth. Thus we skipped the last legs of the planned journey to go back and spend time photographing the samples while they are fresh.

 

The reasons for shimming camera mount/adapter mounts instead just doing the sensor are many. Shimming the camera sensor means disassembling the camera for once, and when I started it wasn't even known by how much the register distance was off. Thus the sensor shims would entail disassembling the camera, put shims in, reassemble the camera, test the various lenses, and then repeat the process. Over and over again. A tedious procedure if there ever was one.

 

I first found by trial and error how much the camera mount itself could be shimmed and still be functional with native Z and CPU lenses/FTZ. That was only 0.1mm, which was still way off the mark. Next step was to add shims to first the RF(S)-Z adapter until these old rangefinder focused acceptably to infinity in visible, UV, and IR. That point was around 0.5mm +-0.05mm for all my RF Nikkors. I opted for 0.5mm as that was spot on with the 3.5 and 8.5cm lenses, and good enough for the 10.5cm f/2.5 Nikkor and the Voigtländer 21mm f/4 (both of which, however, would have like a tad more). Thus the total adjustment of the register was 0.6mm for the RF(S) lenses. About the same held for the F-mount lenses as well although some of the wide angles were marginally off in UV.

 

Finally, the camera and the various adjusted adapters were clearly marked by violet nail polish to identify them as being a bespoke UV/IR/Multispectral kit. If these adapters were to be used on my other Z bodies, focusing would be all wrong.

[Andrea B.]

Thanks for the update!

This is quite an interesting way to adjust register. Perhaps it will be useful in the future to other folks. :)

[nfoto]

Only if register distance of the modified camera is too short ....

[dabateman]

An alternative I have used is adding glass to the back of a lens if possible.

 

I cut the dust shaker off my E510 camera recently, to gain access into UVB. But this obviously looses infinity focus. But with my Peleng 8mm fisheye, I can add glass to the back and found that I need 2mm with a IR gel filter to regain infinity focus.

 

Do you have the opposite problem? You loose close focusing as the sensor is too close to the mount?

 

Maybe the test lens is really off at Lifepixel or they over compensate for some lenses. Not too bad to be too short, as macro helicoid adapters will most likely appear in time for the Z mount. Just dial in the extra extension as needed for the lens in use.

[nfoto]

Initially, I needed almost all focusing extension of the lens just to reach infinity ... Thus infinity would in practice also be the near limit :( Either Lifepixel don't care or they have the wrong test procedure.

 

Helicoid adapters will be helpful only for lenses requiring (relatively speaking) a lot of extension to focus to infinity on the Z camera. This would include, for example, enlarger lenses or lenses made for (D)SLRs. With my old rangefinder lenses, getting a narrow enough helicoid would be next to impossible.