What would you suggest as a beginner affordable UV pass filtering solution

[microbat52]

So my converted camera has definitely some UV transmitance, I dont know how useful or good, but now I want to try it out see what I can get.

 

Ive been looking at the stickies on UV filters and transmitance charts and trying to find options but:

1. I cant see filters of size 40.5mm mounted. Im happy to get an unmounted one and fitted myself but even that is proving hard.

2. My god the prices. As soon as they go bigger than 20mm the price skyrockets.

3. The IR problem.

 

So Im feeling a bit lost with all the things to consider and options and cost. I cant justify spending 100 pounds on a filter for an old broken camera that is not worth 20 pounds.

 

Do you have any sugggestions for somebody that just wants to do experiments with a cheap camera? I dont need the best optical quality so happy to stack filters and do some DIY.

 

I just need some direction.

 

Thanks!!

[Stefano]

The cheapest UV-pass filter you can have is a stack of chinese BG glass + chinese U glass (such as ZWB2).

[microbat52]

The cheapest UV-pass filter you can have is a stack of chinese BG glass + chinese U glass (such as ZWB2).

 

Thanks! So say a BG38 with a ZWB2,cool see what I can find!

[nfoto]

In the UV/IR business, having a lot of step up/down adapter rings quickly becomes mandatory !!!

[microbat52]

In the UV/IR business, having a lot of step up/down adapter rings quickly becomes mandatory !!!

 

My god this all sounds really complicated hahaha

 

Im actually thinking, if I shoot in darkness with the UV torch as light source.... I should be able to take a UV reflected image, there will be some contamination from the fluorescence but much lower intensity...and surely it wont get cheaper than that!

 

Guess I have my work cut out for me.

[Cadmium]

Use S8612, it has the strongest IR suppression and deepest UV transmission ratio.

Do not use BG38, it will leak IR (it can be good for visual). BG40 can be good for visual also, but leaks IR also unless you use 4.5mm thick, which is close to S8612 2mm (the most versatile and recommended usual thickness of S8612).

Hoya U-360 2mm thick is the best choice for UV stacks, unless you want to cut the UV lower (which will require slightly longer exposures), then you can use U-340 2mm or UG11 2mm).

Even U-360 1mm + S8612 2mm, has a little faster exposure (slightly faster than a Baader U even).

Here are my three recommended stacks:

1) U-360 2mm + S8612 2mm

2) U-340 (or UG11) 2mm + S8612 2mm

3) U-360 1mm + S8612 2mm

 

#1 is my favorite.

They all look about the same when optimally white balanced.

 

U-340 and UG11 tend to corrode also, whereas U-360 (and UG1) are not as prone to corrosion.

S8612 is prone to corrosion, it needs to be cleaned, unless it is AR coated.

 

BG39 is identical to S8612 except it doesn't transmit UV as deep, so it cuts off the depth and strength of any UV stack it is used for.

S8612 is the improved UV stack version of BG39, and they are both prone to corrosion the same amount.

[dabateman]

Yes I wanted to say don't buy BG38 if you expect to block IR.

It might be expensive but you only need to buy it once, that is 2mm S8612.

 

I have 4mm BG38 and it leaks a little IR.

 

If you want to go cheap you can get 2mm to 2.5mm BG39, but you will be cutting your UV.

 

As for UV filters, there you can get away with many things. The Chinese seller I have ordered from has good Zwb glass without any visible leaks. So its easier to get cheaper uv filters now.

[microbat52]

Thank you much all of you!!!!

[Andrea B.]

All the info we have about filters is in the Filter Sticky.

https://www.ultravio...vvisir-filters/

Please do look at that. Then some of the responses above will be in better context.

(I see that you did look at it, so nevermind..... )

 

For UV-pass you do want good optical quality in the sense of blocking all Visible and Infrared light which contaminate reflected UV-photos. I don't personally recommend ZBW glass because the quality control is not there yet. You might get good ZBW glass, you might not.

[Andy Perrin]

The real problem with ZBW is that, unless you are one of the lucky bunch on this board with a spectrometer, you can't be sure what you're seeing. Which makes testing lenses, etc. very difficult.

[microbat52]

I think for my current purposes ( just playing around with old camera for fun and for cheap) that sounds acceptable!

 

And if at some point I want to upgrade, at least I will have more of a background and understanding.

 

Made some orders to china, see if they arrive by february!

[ulf]

For a quick try at UV-photography, just "dipping a toe in the water" Chinese filters can be a good path due to the low cost.

Less money to loose if the decision later is that it was not as interesting as first thought.

[Bill De Jager]

In the UV/IR business, having a lot of step up/down adapter rings quickly becomes mandatory !!!

 

If funds are extremely limited, you can sometimes get good deals on used adapter rings at keh.com. The problem of course is that at any given time they may not have the size you need.

[microbat52]

Thanks Bill, found cheap adaptors on amazon so should not be an issue, ill check the website though!

[ulf]

On eBay there are several sellers with many types of step rings to very nice prices.

They are so cheap that I often guess a possible future need and buy extras. They have always worked well.

Having several types of step up and step down rings in stock has saved my day many times already.

 

One thing to do is to standardise the typical filter size an stick to that when ever possible.

I have 52mm filters for my UV-range filters (+ some for VIS-IR too) and 77mm for my VIS + IR.

The 52nn filter is often big enough to work well on many UV-capable lenses.

The 77mm is for some of my old Canon EF-zooms that use for IR

[SteveE]

Be sure and check the threads on your adapter rings. I have found that the threads on some cheap rings are very rough, and might scrape up the threads on the lens.

[Andy Perrin]

I mostly just take my chances. If a ring looks like it might be bad, I toss it.

[Andrea B.]

I would save up and go for a good S8612+U-360 stack or an SEU* or a Kolari UV-Pass.

 

Should you tire of reflected UV photography, any of these filter choices hold enough value to be resold and recoup some of the expense.

 

*SEU is not the current Straightedge.

[Gamma]

I am wondering if the filters recommended above will improve the quality of my pictures.

For the two pictures I have posted, I used a 330WB80, 50mm f/2.8 Steinheil Munchen Cassar S and a Canon M10.

I brought a 27mm 'UV filter' from China for a few dollars and removed the glass and put the 330WB80 in.

 

I have been looking at different filters and have been having trouble deciding on a large size filter to buy.

I have lenses from 35mm to 135mm.

I would prefer to not have an oxidization problem later on.

UVR Optics has three types on sale. I have seen the filters that UVIR Optics sells, as well as the Kolari one and I have read about the Baader U.

 

 

[Andy Perrin]

To be honest oxidation is not a real problem. It is easily cured with hydrogen peroxide and a soft cloth once a year or so. That's basically a care-and-handling thing, not a "problem."

 

The 330WB80 is actually a very nice filter, especially rear-mounted on the back of the lens (you can use 3M poster putty). It is a dichroic filter, though, like the Baader, and both of them share the problem of color change near the edge of the frame when using wider angle lenses, which you can see in your photos above. Rear-mounting the filter helps this problem considerably at the expense of making it hard to change filters on the fly.

 

I would get the recommended stack above (absorption glass filters, rather than dichroic) because they give more even results. It may also be nice to have a Baader eventually, but I have been taking UV pics for years without one and I've been very happy.

 

The much bigger issue for you, aside from the dichroic issues which you can address by rear-mounting and using longer lenses, is that your Cassar is just a soft lens. I have one also, and it's the same for me. Bernard seems to have gotten a sharper one than either of us. If I were you, I would buy an EL-Nikkor 80mm/5.6 lens (the old metal version, not the new plastic one) and see how that helps. I don't think filtration is your main issue!

[dabateman]

My 50mm also ended up being soft.

Filters I prefer:

1. Baader venus u, its just so crispy.

2. 1mm ug1 with 2mm S8612

3. 330WB80 improved filter

4. 390bp25, similar to the Straight edge u generation 3, which I don't own yet.

 

The advantage of getting 2mm S8612 is you can stack it with ug5, ug1, ug11, b370, for various effects.

The advantage of the straight edge u filter is it allows most cameras and lenses to capture a UV like photo.

My 390bp25 on either of my Sigma 30mm f2.8 or 19mm f2.8 smooth focus barrel art lenses is nice for AF in UV handheld.

 

With all this filter talk I feel itching for a new baader venus u. My current one has a massive crack in it. Doesn't effect most lenses, but not pleasant. Anyone want to sell me a good used one for what I paid for my first one ($200), let me know. The cost has doubled over the years.

[Stefano]

A question: is a soft UV lens also soft in visible light or is it a UV artifact since the lens was not designed for UV?

 

David, if you get a second Baader U keeping your current cracked one, you may try photographing a Baader U with a Baader U. There's no real reason to do this, just for fun.

[dabateman]

A question: is a soft UV lens also soft in visible light or is it a UV artifact since the lens was not designed for UV?

 

David, if you get a second Baader U keeping your current cracked one, you may try photographing a Baader U with a Baader U. There's no real reason to do this, just for fun.

 

Andrea has a couple and could try it. But should be clear with a 365nm flashlight.

 

Although, could be interesting off angle.

[Andy Perrin]

A question: is a soft UV lens also soft in visible light or is it a UV artifact since the lens was not designed for UV?

Sometimes they are sharp in visible light but have strong chromatic aberration in UV, giving rise to color fringes. But aside from that issue, I've noticed that my lenses that are sharp in visible are mostly sharp in UV also, up to a point. For example: the Noflexar 35mm, and the EL-Nikkor 80mm.

[Andrea B.]

Also note that diffraction sets in a stop or two "later" in UV light. So at f/11, say, you might see some diffraction blur in visible light which would not be there in UV light. Thus the thing to do is this: Find the best aperture for your lens in both UV and Vis light and make a note of it so that you can use the lens at its best even if it is a little softish overall.