Search the Community

I've noticed something now working with my Hoya R72 filter. Using a modified camera or not, when I push and pull too far, I get this odd blotchiness in certain sections. Can anyone comment on what this is? I've been told it's related to wavelengths.

Haven't had any luck searching for this. Want best filter for stock camera doing UVIVF. Can't figure out which B+W it is. Thanks, Doug A

My go to shop seems to be gone. Where do I buy the special Hoya and Schott filters for bug view and other things? Even B&H only seem to have Hoya 720 ir and Bader U. Not even finding replacements for my Hoya 360 or Schott S8612. Now I'm nervous about losing or dropping a filter. Thanks, Doug A

I'm considering moving my deepest sunlight stack a bit more into 310nm or 308nm... I'm considering buying another IV 308 filter to replace my UV-B stack. Current one is IV 308nm + Hoya U340 4mm. Do you think this can give me an UV-B stack? - GFX 50R mono + quartz coverglass + UV-Nikkor + 2 x IV 308nm filter? I want to use this for outdoor photos using sunlight only... I know there are people there who can save me costly mistake, is there anything that will make this setup impossible? I've calculated transmission by just multiplying my current IV 308nm with itself here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1y2XAs5Y12vt_tVL7wj4EZregpfbQ8yrxny7_OY7qyrY/edit?usp=sharing

Well, here it is, the fabled filter from Midwest Optical that seems to be great for Aerochrome-style photos: The Triple Bandpass TB550/660/850. You can't buy it from any store or online store, unfortunately, but only directly from Midwest Optical. Or, and this is how I did it, from a dealer on Ebay. That also comes out a lot cheaper. Originally, I inquired with Midwest Optical. They only seem to sell to companies, colleges, and so on. And the prices are very high. Filter size 77mm costs around 1100 Swiss francs (is about the same in US dollars right now). Even filter size 37.5mm - which I have now - still costs around 600 Swiss francs new. Unbelievable. I paid around 50 francs/dollar for a 37.5mm at the Ebay dealer (including delivery costs). Actually, I wanted to test today, but the Sahara dust, which is currently blown over all of Europe, currently leads to heavy cloud formation. The sun glitters only in between from behind the gray ceiling. Nevertheless, I was outside and took some pictures. Here is one of them, which shows very well the Aerochrome color change. The car is actually red, as is the hydrant. Preliminary assessment: The filter seems to work very well, possibly with better results than with the green-orange combination. It is greenish-yellow (thus reminiscent of my combi), but reflects strangely. What does it do exactly? It lets only green, red and near infrared (NIR) pass. By simply switching color channels (NIR is imaged in the blue channel, so you make blue -> red, red -> green, and green -> blue), you get a false-color IR image that strongly resembles Aerochrome. Because the process is so simple, I see great potential in it for video projects. The Orange-Green method is not very suitable for filming, because the processing is rather tedious and artifacts occur. I think and hope that this will be much easier with the triple bandpass filter. The blue vegetation (before the channel swap) is already there, the white balance also fits very well (with 2500 Kelvin). Am curious how the results will look in sunshine.

I have been thrown a bit by some false colors I am getting with some filters. The three photos below were all taken with a Panasonic GF1 full-spectrum-modified, a Schneider-Kreuznach Radiogon 4/35 (4 elements/4 groups) lens, f8, ISO 800, the Vis exposure was 1/800s, the two UV bandpass filters were 2s. Overcast day, mid-afternoon. In-camera WB on a PTFE disc, each filter was WB separately. One-click PP WB. I was so close that I used the Vis focusing on the UV shots...laziness. :) 1st image - Vis with NIR-Block filter 2cd image is with a UV 379BP43 filter. The colors seem pretty "UV standard". 3rd image is with a UV 330BP93 bandpass filter. The colors are totally unexpected. (I also took shots with a Hoya 72 NIR pass filter over the UV filters. They showed no leakage in the NIR.) Has anyone had similar Colorchecker results in the UV? Thanks.

I was looking at some photos made with my old Panasonic Lumix GH-1 full spectum conversion using a UV-capable lens equipped with the 340BP15 UV-pass filter, which was purchased on Ebay from Omega Bob about 12 years ago. The photo displays a round of PTFE, 3 Labsphere standards (99%, 75%, 50%), a Rudbeckia flower, a Bidens flower, and a B+W 093 IR-pass filter. Here is the Raw Digger raw composite of that image. Raw composites have no white balance applied. For display here as a JPG, an sRGB profile was embedded. In Photoshop Elements I selected the large PTFE area and averaged the color to get a saturated, moderately bright color. The yellow dot next to the text is that average color brought to full saturation and brightness. Yellow is at 60° on the color wheel, green is at 120° and halfway between at 90° is lime-green. So this averaged near-yellow color is nowhere near lime-green and even further from green. But because the color is just 67% bright, it appears to have more green than it actually has. We have discussed this color illusion before. As pure yellow becomes darker we begin to perceive it as a type of green usually termed olive green. The 340BP15 filter is too narrowband to produce much false color when white balanced by the usual methods. (We've discussed this before also.) Here is the image after white balancing in Photo Ninja. It is almost black & white. There are some hints of dark yellow. And there is a lot of blue noise. But the false color is not saturated and not bright. I'm not sure where all those blue specks came from. After applying Noise Ninja, most of them went away. I think the two little blue dots at the top middle are actually blown pixels. This is the de-noised image. Here is the raw histogram. You can clearly see why the basic raw colors are yellows. We are all intrigued by the yellowish-green and green colors seen around 330/340 nm. I found that the 340BP15 I was using produced a nice closer-to-lime-green color when a 2000°K white balance was applied in Silky Pix (a native converter for Panasonic Lumix images). So keep that little trick in mind to try the Kelvin scale when shooting or converting narrowband 330/340 nm images. The false color still did not get to 90° lime-green, but I like the outcome better than the raw composite version. If I were finishing this image, I would work on some of the dark areas which are somewhat blocked. The GH-1 doesn't have much dynamic range compared to newer digital cameras. But this topic was just about the color and the white balance, so I skipped any extended processing. Here is a sampler of yellow becoming dark, left to right. Brightness decreases 10% per block. The rightmost block is black, 0% bright.

Hello, I was planning to buy a few Tangsinuo filters I don't yet own, namely a TSN575 with it's superior red supression. I was also thinking of buying a QB21, it is a new offering of theirs and it is supposedly multi coated, which prevents corrosion and increases transmission. It supposedly has a better transmission at the lower end of the UV spectrum compared to the QB39 I already have. But I'm generally not sure if it's worth it. Lastly I want to get a second ZWB1 for a thicker stack, but supposedly with a TSN575 I don't need a thicker stack to not have leaks with ZWB1's weaker red supression? But TSN575 has worse transmission in the lower UV wavelengths which is generally the anthithesis of what the ZWB1 is used for. Basically what I mean is, would it be better to use the 4mm worth of ZWB1 with the QB21, or the thinner 2mm ZWB1 with a TSN575? I want to get this stack to better utilize the light from my reptile UVB 15.0 bulb. Edit: methinks the TSN575 could be good for UV+blue type stacks, maybe with a ZWB3 or deep blue type glasses.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/223219705237 Have we discussed this before? How does this adjustable IR-pass work? Is it an IR-pass paired with a polarizer? How can that go from 530 to 750 nm ?? ADDED LATER: Yes, this filter was discussed here: Variable IR Filter

I had purchased a variable ND for video work in the past https://www.amazon.com/Concept-Variable-Neutral-Adjustable-Cleaning/dp/B00JL4INW8?source=ps-sl-shoppingads-lpcontext&ref_=fplfs&psc=1&smid=A3JK7NEF4ES3E9 It was collecting dust until I saw Andrea's adjustable IR filter topic and I decided to test my variable ND with a full spectrum camera. I think there are probably one's that block IR but this one passes both, but cuts the visible a lot on the max on the dial. I made a short video clip of this inside at night with ambient light being a non IR emitting bulb, Filter on MIN, WB on grey ptfe tape. Object is a Playstation media remote that becomes transparent in IR. Slowly turn the filter to max, and ambient light gets cut quite a bit. Camera picks up a regular incandescent bulb in another room, but not too bright. I then turn on the 940nm torch to see through the remote. I think this is kinda cool, but probably not much use in sunlight because of all the IR

While discussing a problem with filter retaining ring replacement, I saw again this Amazon link from our member Enrico. It brings up some rubber filter wrenches which can be very useful if you have ever needed to dismantle a lens or any of its parts. Then if you scroll down the page, you see other tools like the wrap-around filter wrenches, the metal spanner wrenches and a nifty set of camera screwdrivers. I'm not sure how long this link will last, but here it is. Lens Tools Link [Our usual disclaimer: UVP, Andrea, and Birna are not affiliated monetarily with any commercial website and gain no benefit from any member's purchases.]

As I once alluded to, I am looking for a false color style that will produce blue trees. I have already tested a few things. Little has been promising so far. I tested almost the whole Lee filter swatch catalog with different combinations as well as with additional KG3 IR blocker. Either the sky becomes too green or the vegetation too pale blue. The following photo is my best attempt so far and already close to my ideal. Used a stack of Hoya X1 (Green) and Hoya K2 (Yellow 8). X1 alone and K2 alone don't produce the desired result. With X1 and K2 combo unprocessed, the trees become purple and the sky bluish-cyan. With a little work on the slider, the sky easily becomes a deep blue. However, the adjustments for blue in vegetation are much more involved. And the result is still not optimal for me. Only certain plants are blue, others remain purple or even take on yellowish tones. Here I would hope for more of a uniform blue. Of course, the ideal would be a filter combination that produces this result quasi in-camera. So that few adjustments are necessary. Maybe someone has another idea? Sepia or chocolate/gold filters are mentioned again and again, but to be honest they never worked for me. Or the look is not what I'm looking for.

This post is related to my earlier thread https://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/5686-a-few-nir-low-pass-filters-and-others-tested/ . As reported in the older thread, I assembled a variable NIR-pass filter from a color filter, a reversed circular polarizer, and a linear polarizer. Only this time, instead of a red color filter, I used a Hoya 80B, which is a pale blue-cyan filter originally designed to use tungsten color film in natural daylight. From the transmission spectrum of this filter in the above thread, we know that it transmits NIR, but it also transmits (to a lower extent) across the whole VIS. Why not? The weather here has been dreary for a while, so the only reason for me to go out is to walk the dog, but without carrying a camera. At last the fog has largely lifted, although the sky is featureless grey, so I can shoot from our terrace. Not an inspiring view, but enough for a quick test with the Olympus 12-40 f/2.8 Pro on full-spectrum E-PL6, then I let ThumbsPlus decide how to autobalance the JPGs. No changes in contrast etc. aside from this. At 40 mm FL , three different filter settings give interesting results. I am adding a shot at 12 mm FL, which obviously shows that the filter is not suitable for wideangle shooting, but gives far more false color than I expected, especially from the building in the background which is off-white and grey in VIS.

I just published on my web site a few tests of NIR low-pass filters, as well as other filters that potentially may be used in NIR imaging. For details, see https://www.savazzi.net/photography/low-pass-nir-filters.html As a summary, it might be useful to have the normalized transmission spectra here. In addition, I also discussed and tested a "variable NIR filter": https://www.savazzi.net/photography/variable-nir-filter.html Also attached are the normalized transmission spectra of this filter at three settings.

I'm thinking of retooling for the new year. Thinking of picking up an A6000 full spectrum from life pixel and a Badder U possibly from B&H. I know the camera is low end but I'm hoping it's a step up from my really low end Nex 5n. I've seen a user or two on here with the A6000 so it seems to work. Anyone use this or have any comment? I'm also hoping the Baader U is a step up in transmission. I have a La La U by UVIROptics but I think its best transmission is like 30% at 360nm or something. Where is the best place to get a Baader U? For photography I read here that it works best threads first. How thick is the Baader U with it's brass body? Thanks

Here's a video I shot a few months ago when I first got my Samsung Galaxy Z-Flip3 smartphone. I held up a 760nm cut-on filter over the lens and was surprised how well it turned out. I finally created a Vimeo account to post the occasional video here so this one is my first attempt. I didn't make any adjustments to the camera settings, it automatically pops into night mode when the scene gets dark enough. I only edited the video to reduce the bitrate so the filesize would be better for online. There is a prominent hotspot in the IR portion of the video. If you're wondering why the foreground grass looks dark in IR it's fake grass, some sort of vinyl plastic. Here's a few stills taken at the same location recently using the same smartphone & filter. I monochromed them and reduced to 2000 pixels for posting here. The last one was taken in the shade and could barely be handheld due to a slow exposure of 1/17 second. The quality isn't superb but remember these were taken with a lens smaller than the button on your shirt. The gear. The little 27mm filter is about the right size to allow a wide angle shot from the phonecam's tiny lens. 720 and 760nm filters worked best. 800nm was getting too dark for handheld shots. The IR only works in bright daylight but the little filter makes a nice accessory for this smartphone.

Hi, just a very quick (hopefully) question: - Can you reccomend some IR longpass filter (not chinease no-name which can be anything) passing above 1um and blocking below? Why? I realized I'm trying to get as low as possible with UV, even attempting UV-C, but never tried what can I do at the other end... I have Hoya R72 and some no-name IR850 one... nothing above 850, is there any reccommended, checdked & confirmed filter to pass only above 1 micron? Ideally 52mm size.

In a recent topic, some suggestions were made (by me and others) about white balancing a Nikon camera when using an IR-pass filter. It had been so long since I made the experiments for such a WB that I thought I should repeat them to refresh my memory. Here is the Visible scene I used for the experiment. D610 + UV-Nikkor + Kolari IR-Blocker f/8 for 1/250" @ ISO-100 For comparison purposes and out of curiosity, I made some WB both with and without the B+W 092 IR-pass filter. All photos are SOOC. They were made with a Neutral picture control so fairly bland looking. 1) WB made "against the scene" with NO filter on the lens. Lots of frosty pink/magenta. 2) WB made against the dark yellow-green juniper bush with NO filter on the lens. Still pink, no surprise. But a bit less intense than the preceding. I think grass is perhaps not as yellow-green as the juniper bush, but I do not have any grass here! 3) WB made against the scene through the B+W 092 IR-pass filter. Clearly this is a useful WB for this IR filter. 4) WB made against the the juniper through the B+W 092 IR-pass filter. This version is pretty much like 3, although the false blue is less intense. In the topic referenced above, there was some discussion about using color displays on a monitor to white balance against. So I experimented with that. 5) WB against a Green Screen with no filter. Doesn't work, obviously. No surprise, as there is no IR. And WB against green pushes the balance towards magenta. 6) WB against a Yellow-Green Screen with no filter. Again, this does not work. A bit more of a blue-pink. (WB against yellow-green pushes color towards blue-magenta.)

Hello everyone, this post is going to be generally pretty informal, as I'm in a rush today, and I don't have time for polish. For context, I like messing around with filter combinations, especially IR reduction filters in combination with color filters with NIR transmission of the range 700-850nm. I got an idea a while back, and realized it would be pretty much impossible to execute without some tedium. I called up my optics manufacturer, and next thing I know, I have the following filters: 400nm+ 450nm+ 470nm+ 490nm+ 535nm+ 565nm+ 610nm+ 650nm+ 690nm+ 720nm+ 760nm+ 800nm+ 850nm+ *not included in today's test I took an image with each of these filters using a tripod, with the same white balance and exposure settings, converted them all into TIF, and then placed them into blender. Although not easy to see, the leftmost two columns contain the images, which were in an HDR format to prevent data loss, which explains the odd groups instead of image texture nodes. Then each image, was subtracted by the next higher nm filter, to get a band of data which expresses the difference in those filters. Repeat this process for each image, and now you have a series of bands, each representing a range of light in nm. The image above in particular, is the 720nm-760nm band + 760nm-800nm band, white balanced, and set as material output as a proof of concept. With this data collection and processing method, it is in principle possible to emulate any and all filters given a small enough bandwidth, with this set of filters, I was aiming for 40nm bands, the next set will be 20nm bands, and will give me even more of a headache. I hope you enjoyed staring at this monstrosity, and I thank you for reading through.

I have been 3d-printing some adapters that permit me to install one of my UV bandpass filters on the M4/3 camera side of my Exakta and M42 lenses. I have often wished to get the filter behind the lens for macro shots and now I can. I am thinking about offering such adapters as an inexpensive accessory to any UV-bandpass filter sales. So, I am taking a poll to determine which mount adapters are most popular with UV photographers. So far, I have Exakta and M42 in and M4/3 out. What are the IN/OUT combinations that you use? (Obviously, this would only apply to those cases with a large difference between the FFD of the lens and the FFD of the camera.) I'm looking forward to your input. Thanks.

Here in one location is a collection of transmission charts for the various UV-Pass filters and filter stacks we use. The Index is at the end of this first post. Note: Our UVIR Filters Sticky has more links to filter sellers, data and charts. If you have a chart not shown here, please post it in this thread or in its own topic. Later I will add it to the Index list. Many charts here have been provided by Uviroptics (Ebay) and UVR Optics (UVR Defense Tech). Thank you! ********** Here is a link to the Schott chart making program. You can enter Hoya data also. Or any data you might happen to have. Go to Schott's Download Library at this link: http://www.us.schott...load/index.html There you will see a drop-down menu from which you should select "More Downloads". You will then see a checkbox list containing the "Optical Filter Glass Calculation Program US". Check it and a Download button will pop up. Click the Download button to complete the download of a Zip file containing the program. The Program is in the form of an Excel spreadsheet, so Excel will be needed to open and use it. For more on entering Hoya data, see Post #23 below where I have copied some hints from Ebay Uviroptics. ********** Here is a link to UV photographer Boon Tang's blog about various UV-pass filters: http://myphotojourne...s-a-comparison/ A nice Rudbeckia is used as a test subject for the stacks. INDEX of POSTED TRANSMISSION CHARTS UV-PASS Filters: already assembled AndreaU MK-II BaaderU (old and new) LUV U2 LaLa U StraightEdgeU Invisible Vision 308 HOYA Glass: UV+IR as basis for UV-Pass Made in Japan? Hoya does have divisions in other countries. See also Stacks below. Warning: The U-340 in a 1.0mm thickness LEAKS in the 550 range. THE U-340 (1.0mm) IS NOT RECOMMENDED! Go thicker. U-340 (2.0mm) U-340 (2.0mm) U-340 (2.5 mm) U-360 (1.0mm) U-360 (2.0mm) U-360 (2.0mm) SCHOTT Glass: IR-Block Made in Germany. See also Stacks links below. BG3 (1.5mm) BG25 (2.0mm) BG38 (2.0mm) BG39 (2.0mm) BG39 (2.0mm) BG40 (2.0mm) S8612 (1.0mm) S8612 (1.75mm) S8612 (2.0mm) S8612 (2.0mm) SCHOTT Glass: UV+IR as basis for UV-Pass Made in Germany. See also Stacks links below. UG1 (1.0mm) UG1 (1.0mm) UG1 (2.0mm) UG1 (2.0mm) UG11 (1.0mm) UG11 (1.0mm) UG11 (1.0mm) UG11 (2.0mm) UG11 (2.0mm) UG11 (2.0mm) UG11 (2.5mm) ZWB Glass: UV+IR as basis for UV-Pass Made in China by Optima and other manufacturers. Please read warning and notes!! ZWB filter glass varies by manufacturer/vendor. Some ZWB glass has excessive striations or other flaws. Please check the forum discussions for the latest information about ZWB filters and where UVP members are buying them. ZWB1, ZWB2, ZWB3 Optima ZBW1-1mm, ZBW2-2mm, ZBW3-2mm Transmission data and graphs. Obvious visual leaks. ZBW1-2mm, ZBW3-1.5mm, OBG39 transmission charts. UV/IR-Cut Baader UV/IR-Cut Neewer Bk UV IR Cut GLASS EQUIVALENTS These charts correlate the manufacturer's names for various filter glass. Full charts are available at Kopp Glass: Filter Glass Equivalency Guide Newport Industrial Glass: Filter Glass Cross Reference Some chart excerpts are shown here: Blue-Green :: IR-Pass :: IR+Red Pass :: UV-Pass STACKS BG3 (1.5mm) + S8612 (1.5mm) BG3 (2.0mm) + S8612 (1.5mm) BG3 (2.0mm) + S8612 (2.0mm) BG3 (1.5mm) + BG39 (2.0mm) BG3 (2.0mm) + BG39 (2.0mm) UG1 (1.0mm) + S8612 (1.75mm) UG1 (2.0mm) + BG38 (2.0mm) UG1 (2.0mm) + BG39 (2.0mm) UG1 (2.0mm) + BG40 (2.0mm) UG1 (2.0mm) + S8612 (1.0mm) UG1 (2.0mm) + S8612 (1.5mm) UG5 (.75mm)+ S8612 (2.0mm) UG5 (1.0mm)+ S8612 (2.0mm) UG5 (1.5mm)+ S8612 (2.0mm) UG5 (2.0mm) + S8612 (2.0mm) U-340 (2.0mm) + BG39 (2.0mm) U-340 (2.0mm) + BG40 (2.0mm) U-340 (2.0mm) + S8612 (1.0mm) U-340 (2.0mm) + S8612 (1.5mm) U-340 (2.0mm) + S8612 (1.5mm) COMPARISONS BG38, BG39, BG40 and S8612 BG39 and S8612 U-340 with different IR blockers U-340, U3-60, UG1 and UG11 U-360 and UG1 UG1 with different IR blockers UG5 in different thicknesses with S8612 UG11 in two thicknesses UG11 and U-340

I saw someone else do this so it made me want the ZWB3 for an IR filter. Photo taken with a full spectrum Nex 5n, Owltech adapter, ZWB3 filter, Tokina 11-20 @ 16mm and aprox ƒ/5.6 - ISO 200 - 1/80. White balance not entirely worked out but set in camera from a grey piece of plastic then worked on further in photo ninja/photoshop.

Sometimes symmetrical images might be interesting, even if it normally is considered wrong to compose a picture that way. I always have been drawn to pictures of roads vanishing forward, especially if there are rows of trees on both sides. Tunnels sometimes have the same affect. Here are two examples from when I was testing my old Canon FD 20/2.8 SSC for hotspots. That lens and the Canon FD 17/4.0 SSC seamed OK, for hotspots, at least at f/8.0 and less. The filters I used are a the Zomei 850nm and the B+W 040 (ca 550nm) The 850nm image is a result from fusing several (5) exposure bracketed images in Hugin The 040 filter is the same as I used for the Goldie of the old castle, but this time without Goldie processing, just WB and Highlight/Shadow enhancement of one image in Photoshop. I liked the spooky surreal colours of the bright parts that I got. The tunnel and wooden bridge are from the same castle Månstorps Gavlar as last time

I noticed a US seller offering a range of items that they say came from a job lot from a US military lab, including an Edmunds Optics Hoya U340 50mm square x 2.5mm filter. I don't have one and so am mildly interested but the seller's photo shows a peice of glass that has a degree of transparency in (presumably) visible light. The published internal transmittance graph for this item (SKU 46-440; https://www.edmundoptics.co.uk/document/download/353911) suggests to me that this glass should be pretty much black. But of course, I haven't seen one... https://www.ebay.com/itm/114655695356 Is this likely to be a mis-label item or does U-340 actually look like that? Thanks for any help

In my efforts to get to the first base of UV photography, I brought a few Vivitar 285's and started converting them according to guidance here etc - including precautions for risk from the dangerous high voltage circuitry. So far I'm not too unhappy - two successfully 'converted'; one more dead (seems to have been a late model with incredible fragile soldering; now charges but won't discharge). I noticed, however, that the UV output of when using one flash is quite low and the unit has to be very close to the subject at full power to get half-decent exposure. This is limiting my aperture and sensor ISO choices. Ideally, I'd like to use the same flash position for visible and UV with the same camera setting (just changing the filters) but I can't reduce the output enough (min 1/16) for visible light so I'm having to use a second unconverted flash further back for visible comparison. For the conversion, I've used a replacement window over the flash tube and reflector made from CD case plastic. I think this is likely to be a polystyrene-type material. It does appear to transmit a good amount of UV at 365nm based on a crude torch test (with and without subject material, UV torch and visible fluorescence of 'white' items with optical brighteners). So, is the low output due to a coated flash tube, inherently low UV output, absorption by the CD material, or absorption by the zoom head fresnel (OK with UV torch) Would using UV transmitting acrylic, UV glass, or fused silica (quartz) likely work better? I'm guessing no window is not recommended? In addition, is there any info on how far into UV I can expect these units go? It seems to depend on the grade of quartz used to form the tube but I don't seem anything specific to these. For fluorescence work, I presume that windows made from ZWB2 would suffice? Seems like a lot of questions; any advice gratefully received!