Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

My Pelikan M640 Mount Everest, UVA, IR, Vis


Recommended Posts

KarlBlessing

Most of my fountain pens (particularly the vintage ones made of either celluloid or hard rubber) will show some fluorescing effect with a 365nm LED, but I only did that briefly to see since UV exposure is definitely not recommended for those materials as it breaks down the color as well as increases oxidation of older hard rubber.

 

My more modern one, a Pelikan M640 Special Edition Mount Everest appears to have some UV blocking property on the acrylic material used to cover the gold etching of the barrel.

 

Some Visible light photos for reference (using the same lighting source I used today):

 

m640inbox.jpg

m640barrelclose.jpg

m640detail.jpg

 

You wouldn't tell from the photos that there was a clear coat on top, hence no texture to the touch.

 

Then in 850nm Infrared, it remains mostly clear, but with the plastics absorbing more of it and getting darker. Though I do have some black opaque pens, particularly from the 1950s and 1960s that end up transparent under infrared ( https://imgur.com/a/GDKFtZf to see a vis vs IR of some 1950s/1960s Pilot Supers .

 

KKUwW8V.jpg

 

And then the UV-only shot

 

XuM1Ffg.jpg

 

Lighting : Photogenic Powerlight 750 studio monolight strobes

Camera :

For the visible light shot years ago, an old Olympus E-P3 with the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 (90mm equiv, 2.0x crop factor)

For the UV and IR shots above, Pentax Q10 (with IRCut filter removed, no replacement glass, small 1/2.3" sensor), Pentax 01 Prime 8.5mm f/1.9 (47mm equiv, 5.53x crop factor)

Filter in front for IR : Schott RG850 2mm

Filter in front for UV : LUV U II (360FWHM53) made by uviroptic on ebay, basically a SCHOTT UG11 UV Bandpass filter stacked with S8612 glass (Vis/IR suppression), approximately 320nm to 395nm pass thru, with a peak at 360nm.

 

IR Exposure was much much more sensitive that I had to not only bounce the strobe off the ceiling, at 1/4 power, but also place a couple sheets of paper above the pen to further diffuse out the lighting, and shot at 1/250th, f/3.2, ISO 100. Also the Pentax Q10 native lenses use a leaf shutter in the lens, so there is flash sync at any speed, the main factor in exposure here is going to be the aperture and ISO.

 

UV Exposure was much more dense as I'm not sure how much UV light is actually being emitted from my PL750 strobes, but the front flash tube was 3 feet away from the pen, pointed at it, at full power. Exposure being 1/250th, f/3.2, ISO 200.

Link to comment

You converted a Pentax Q10 ?? I *love* those little cams. I have the first Pentax Q and all the lenses.

 

I should be commenting on your results, but I am too distracted by that beautiful pen

and by the idea of converting my Pentax Q. :grin: :grin: :grin:

Link to comment
KarlBlessing

You converted a Pentax Q10 ?? I *love* those little cams. I have the first Pentax Q and all the lenses.

 

I should be commenting on your results, but I am too distracted by that beautiful pen

and by the idea of converting my Pentax Q. :grin: :grin: :grin:

 

The Q10 is extremely easy to convert to full spectrum... but you lose autofocus capabilities (and infinity focus on a lot of the lenses too) if you don't replace it with some kind of glass (so far the standard 01 Prime has been the most useful that can still autofocus appropriately, as long as it's narrowed down to either IR or UV, but if left as UV/Vis/IR it can't focus except for very close).

 

This is the old thread regarding it, and my contributions to my own attempt at it : https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/391340-ir-infra-red-conversion-pentax-q-cameras.html

 

In a nutshell, you're cutting the blocking filter right off the matte box, and snipping the peizo cable (For the dust removal action), and just ending up with a naked sensor.

 

34B52446-1F2F-424A-BCAE-69F516195657.jpeg

 

The problem is, least in terms of UV, is the longer exposure required, means you have to push the ISO up, and the Q10 gets pretty useless above ISO 200~400 in my opinion in terms of final image quality, least compared to all my other cameras at higher-than-400 ISO (Olympus E-M1, Panasonic GH1, GH4, GH5). Long exposure is already limited with the native lens, it's even worse if you use adapted lens, you're stuck to an electronic shutter if using an adapted lens, as well as limited to 2 second exposure maximum. So it isn't as practical in my opinion on the UV side because of the need for longer exposure, and the fullspectrum side of things isn't as useful if you don't do something to replace the blocking filter with the appropriate thickness glass.

 

Also I'm not sure if the same steps can be done to the original Q vs the Q10. (PS: If you have the 08 Wide zoom, I been on the look out for that one for ages, but not sure how it would do with my conversion).

 

Far as pens go...

 

Let's just say I have a few ... http://pbin.be/ and

 

huBy3Oz.jpg

 

SjsPEi8.jpg

 

and I've been playing with checking them under Infrared for a little while (this is an opaque black Montblanc 149)

 

y9XWNo1.jpg

Link to comment

Interesting how the opaque black pen in the last photo is IR transparent.

 

I showed these to my SigOth who also has more pens that strictly required for writing !! :grin: :grin: :grin: He does use his fairly regularly.

We both liked the display of the pen points as they are always quite artistic.

 

I picked up a nice Visconti in Rome, but really I never use it.

I seem to prefer pen-slumming on the Bic side of life to make my grocery lists. :devil:

Link to comment
  • 2 months later...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...