Search the Community

The Gopro Hero is one of the first, and probably most popular, small action cameras. Gopro updates its models about once a year, and so far they have remained slightly more advanced (and more expensive) than the competition. Many of the craziest action sports videos on YouTube have been shot with Gopro Hero cameras. Parts of some commercial TV series and movies have also been shot with these cameras. The sensor is 5.76 mm by 4.29 mm, bigger than that of a typical webcam but smaller than system cameras. Interesting capabilities (not available in all models, or simultaneously) are video up to 4k resolution and up to 240 fps, up to 12 Mpixel still pictures single or in bursts of up to 30 fps, time-lapse video and still pictures, low-light mode, and quite a few other features. All solid-state (no mechanical shutter), built-in Bluetooth and WiFi. A mobile phone app can be used as remote control, or a dedicated remote is available. Some models have a built-in touch LCD screen, others can use one as accessory. There are also plenty of limitations, like no flash sync, no AF, and lens choice restricted to S-mount lenses. This is clearly not a replacement for our multispectral converted system cameras, but on the other hand it can do some things that most of our cameras cannot do, and is extremely small and lightweight. Now, given that we are on the Ultraviolet Photography site, the first natural question is whether the Gopro Hero can be used for UV photography. Strictly speaking, it does not need to be converted to multispectral, since the standard lens has an IR-cut (and presumably UV-cut) filter attached at its rear. NIR and multispectral (VIS+NIR) videos after removing this filter or replacing the lens are available on YouTube, so there is no question that the camera is NIR-capable. I have no information, however, on whether it is usable in UV. The second big question is whether UV-capable lenses are available for this camera. It uses an S mount (M12 x 0.5) lens attachment, and lenses of this type are hardly exciting. However, Rib-Cage makes an overpriced modification kit that allows use of S, CS and C lenses. Rib-Cage also offers an even more overpriced, already converted range of Gopro cameras. A few months ago, I did find some C and convertible to C lenses that are reasonably good in UV, and a few dedicated lenses in C mounts designed for UV imaging are also available. Installing the kit involves a complete disassembly of the camera. Among other things, the sensor is moved from deep within the camera body to flush with its front plate. Therefore, before doing the modification, I would be interested in hearing whether anyone can confirm that the Gopro Hero, and specifically the Gopro Hero 4 Silver/Black, is usable in UV. There might be show-stoppers like a UV-cut coating on the sensor package. If no one has tried so far, I guess I will be the test monkey.

For the large format fans I ran across this company whch claims to have a couple of large format cameras in the works good for UV/vis/IR: http://www.largesense.com/

Since I started playing with UV photography I have been looking for corona discharges. Looking through pictures from last summer, I found some. First I thought it were reflexes. I will try it again. Sony Alpha 6000, Pancake Lens SEL16F28, Baader U-Filter, Daylight (12:37, lunchtime), F/3.2, 1/60 S, ISO 320. Best regards, Wilhelm

Hello, I’m a hobbyist beekeeper in Maryland, with no prior experience of UV photography. I do have some experience with pollen photography and microscopy. My goal is to create a local floral index, to bring out the hidden floral guides in flowers that are often only revealed within the ultraviolet spectrum, and to incorporate this perspective into educational talks for the public. For a camera, I am considering a Nikon D70. It appears to be one of the easier cameras to access and remove the IR/UV filter. It’s also inexpensive, so a botched first attempt won’t be devastating. I’ve not begun looking at lenses, I will need to cut off the spectrum at 650nm and above, as that extends beyond the visual range of the honey bee. So, here I am, looking forward to getting started.

Today I chanced across my old, failed harddrive, which I had set aside in order to take some photos, and decided to give it a go. I used my usual cameras: VIS: Canon EOS 5DSR IR: Canon EOS 6D, converted to 700 nm FS+UV: Canon EOS 6D, converted to full-spectrum As lens I used the EL-Nikkor 80mm f/5.6, set at f/16 throughout. Most of the photos are at ISO 100, only the UVIIRF is at ISO 800, and the UV with UV-LED is at ISO 200. For the UVIIRF I still had to use 30s as exposure time. As is evident from the shadows, I didn't put the torches or the flash on a tripod but handheld them, so the angles are not completely the same, which I don't expect to make any real differences. What do you think? I find it interesting how the circuit paths appear and disappear, and I'll definitely have to check out the glowing bits in the UVIIRF. First, VIS-camera, room lights (Standard Osram LEDs with 2700 K) for lighting: Next, VIS-camera, Nemo-torch (365nm): : FS-camera, without filters, room-lighting (Standard Osram LEDs with 2700 K): FS-camera, without filters, full-spectrum flash (Yongnuo VN560III with the cover removed): FS-camera, without filters, Nemo-torch (365nm): FS-camera, UV-filter by Makario, full-spectrum flash(Yongnuo VN560III with the cover removed): FS-camera, UV-filter by Makario, Nemo-torch (365nm): IR-camera, room-lighting (Standard Osram LEDs with 2700 K): IR-camera, full-spectrum flash (Yongnuo VN560III with the cover removed): IR-camera, Nemo-torch (365nm): IR-camera, LED-torch 850nm: IR-camera, LED-torch 940nm:

A new TV programmed aired last night in the UK: Life in Colour, narrated by David Attenborough. (BBC). I think they mentioned it might be available on Netflix for US and other viewers. It showed several examples of UVR in flowers, fish (underwater) and others. They said they had developed a new camera giving "previously unseen images". The set up looked like two cameras at 90 degrees to each other, with a semi silvered mirror between them so they could switch from visible to UV easily. They only showed UVR, not multispectral images showing "insect vision". Very interesting though if you can catch it. There is another episode next week including insect mimicry which should be very interesting!

Hi there! I am Shamali from India. I am a botanist and just entering the field of UV photography. I aim to work on UV reflectance of flowers. I use a Sony a6000 camera. But I think will have to get a conversion done for UV photography. Your guidance would help in understanding the basics. Thanks..

Hi, I am new to UV photography and looking forward to learn a lot about it in this forum! I am very interested in using UV photography to create awareness about sun protection and to help visualize "sun protection" at an early age to children (and sun damage to adults). I am especially interested in low-cost options of UV photography- that will function in normal sunlight without any additional light sources. My first attempt at buying a UV webcam ​(Model: XNiteUSB2S-MUV) was definitely not successful, so hope that with this forum and wealth of information provided by its members, I will be able to make a more informed decision on purchasing the right equipment.

Greetings from Mount Vernon, Washington, USA! I am grateful to have been introduced and accepted into your community! I am interested in all things light and its use in application. My education is BSEET/ABET from DeVry Institute of Technology, Phoenix 1999. I have eighteen years of engineering and technician experience in the following industries: Industrial Nd:YAG lamp and diode pumped laser markers from 3-100 W at IR/Green wavelengths of 1064nm and 532nm (rofin) Semiconductor stepper & scanner photolithography at UV/DUV wavelengths of 365nm, 248nm, 193nm, and 157nm (ASML USA/Veldhoven at Motorola, TSMC, Texas Instruments, Micron, and IBM) Aerospace metrology laser and radar trackers (Janicki Industries) Commercial HVACR R&D full life cycle product development testing for manufacturing (Legend Brands/Dri-Eaz Products) I look forward to working with you to progress the art and science of Ultraviolet Photography! Create a Great Day! Aaron

Hello All I am excited to join this group and explore the world of UV photography. My interest are in "insect vision" or simulated insect vision. I work in the flower industry and am starting a little side project to learn more about the unseen variation in our crops. Other than being a nerd, I have no experience in UV photography and am planning on using this as a learning platform and hopefully in the near future share some images.

First things first: UV photos: EOS 6D, b/w maxmax-conversion with 330C and S8612, Soligor 21mm VIS photos: EOS 5DSR, Canon EF 11-24mm IR photos: EOS 6D, 700 nm conversion, EF 16-35mm and 11-24mm Due to these differences, the angle-of-view is different, also I took some of the UV-photos on a different day. The first sets of photos were taken at a church nearby (https://de.wikipedia...St._Margarethen). It is amazing, how repair works at the walls can be all but invisible in IR and VIS, but hit you over the head with a mighty big hammer in UV: Next, the colours used in painting buildings, especially the yellow found on plenty of churches, don't always show up in IR and UV, also the huge golden crucifix is rather boring in IR and UV. With the next three, I cheated a bit, as they were taken from the church, overlooking the danube, so not quite a photo of ecclesiastical (Yes, I had to look up how to spell this word) architecture, but there's cross in it, so it counts sort-of. I converted all photos to b/w, just to emphasize the differences (the UV-photo was taken from a triped, as there was not enough sun) The last set was taken at a monastery (https://en.wikipedia...Wilhering_Abbey , I tried some photos in the church of the stunning colours but both IR and UV are just dull, of course). The pink/brown/salmon colour used here does show up in IR and UV, which might also mean that they used different materials here than in the white parts. Bonus photo: the chapel does not look very nice in IR, but I like the colours and the lines.

In the city of Mauthausen there was the largest concentration camp on Austrian soil during the Nazi regime (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauthausen_concentration_camp). All Soul's Day would have been a fitting date to visit it, but I don't have time tomorrow, so I went today. I did not have time to take photos of the many memorials outside of the compound or the infamous quarry (see first photo on the right here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_through_labour ), so I will go back there, but not too soon; the place really gets to you. The morning fog would have made for an eerie mood also with VIS-photos, but I do believe that UV adds to the sombre atmosphere, especially with the usual dark grass and foliage. Camera: Canon EOS 6D, converted to b/w, internal X330C-filter, external S8612 Lens: Soligor 21mm f/3.8

I've been doing some microscopy recently, and a few days ago took a look at a camera sensor I had. This one had been partially converted to monochrome and was damaged, so regions of the sensor has different degrees of removal of the microlenses and Bayer filters. There's a full write-up here showing images with different stages of removal of the filer and lens layers - https://jmcscientifi...-camera-sensor/ Here's a couple of images from the writeup. Firstly, part of the sensor which had not been touched (microlenses and Bayer filter still present). And now part which had had the microlenses and Bayer filter removed.

Browsing ebay the other day I came across something called an Arc lighter. This generates an air plasma between its electrodes as an alternative to a traditional fluid based lighter. As it didn't cost much I thought I'd get one and see what the emission spectra was like. Here's the lighter, without and with being lit. When I put my cosine correcter terminated optical fiber close to it (very close, about 5mm) I just about managed to get the irradiance spectra; Very similar to what I'd expect for an air plasma which was good to see, but really not very bright. Also took some pictures of it in UV, using the ACS converted Nikon d810 (similar response to Baader U), and Rayfact 105mm UV lens. Whitebalanced in Darktable, and cropped from originals. Couple of different exposures. Longer exposure (ISO1000, 6s, f16). Short exposure (ISO1000, 1/2s f16) Obviously with the longer exposure the emission over saturates and goes white, but you can see it illuminating the lighter a bit. At the shorter exposure, the 2 back electrodes are behaving differently to the other 2. I can just about see a hint of yellow in the bulk of the plasma, which make sense given the large emission peak in the 340nm region. Overall not the brightest little UV source (I wont be replacing my Xenon flashes any time soon), but an interesting little device. Part of me wonders whether it shocks like a taser, but I currently have no plans for putting my fingers on the electrodes to try it.....

Just a quick shot of unidentified crustose lichens that can be found everywhere on old stone drywalls on the island of Öland. They form visually featureless flat crusts that are white also in VIS in the dry state. They become somewhat less VIS-reflective when wet, but I have no comparison shot. Mosses and other lichens on the same stone surfaces, in contrast, are UV-dark when dry. My guess is that, as far as UV is concerned, either absorption or reflection of UV in the surface layers is a good adaptive strategy to protect the living tissues underneath. In the VIS and NIR, a reflective (or white) surface could also be adaptive in lowering the temperature of the tissues during periods of high solar irradiation. Full-spectrum Sony A7 II, Baader U, AI Nikkor 24 mm f/2.8. Somewhat underexposed to avoid saturation in the white areas.

Friday was another flyday! Continuing on from Cadmium's post (https://www.ultravio...v-with-a-drone/) and my first flight with the UV filter (https://www.ultravio...a-drone-part-2/) I managed to get some more favourable flight conditions this past weekend. What's odd is that my focusing seemed better in the first video ( ) but was off for most of this recent flight, and the gimbal was struggling in the first flight, but not this time. One day, I am going to find a happy medium. The difference this time is that I took off with the gimbal facing straight down. You can see from the treetops that I had a moderate breeze in both flights, so I think pointing the gimbal down during take-off seemed to help stablise it, as I was able to move it up and down without an issue once I was up in the air. This time, I encoded the video at 1080p, so that you can see the degree of focusing issues. Again, I put a Lumetri monochrome filter on the main part of the video: There's a very short segment at the end (without the Lumetri filter) where I was experimenting with the drone's built-in "Quick Shot" modes (one of those modes is called a "Dronie" which is a selfie with a drone). It's supposed to move away from the subject, climbing to a preset altitude, but I had many problems where it lost the lock on me. I had the same problem when attempting to do the "Helix" Quck Shot of the playground (not shown in this video). Not sure if the software uses colour to recognise the locked object, or if it's purely driven by contrast, but it also failed when I put the Kolari Vision 850nm IR filter on too. Might be down to a lack of sharp focus this time around. The Quick Shots only seem to work in the visible light range. Anyhow, for what it's worth, I included the Dronie attempt right at the end of the video. I still think this filter has potential, but I definitely need to play with it some more. Perhaps increase the ISO and lower the shutter speed a little.

I just acquired an Olympus Em1 camera. I also just ran it through some controlled lighting tests. My questionable used full spectrum Olympus E510 using a tmount kuri 35mm clone with my lights, gave acceptable image with Iso 800, 15sec f5.6. I have tested my stock Olympus E3 and see between 1 to 2 stops more exposure is needed to match the E510. Now after testing the Olympus Em1 I see the same. The Em1 is just more than one stop less sensitive than my E510. Iso 800, 30sec, f5.6 is acceptable. So I wonder have any of the M43rds users on this forum compared their Olympus cameras before and after full spectrum conversion? Do you see more than 2 stop improvement? I also at the same time compared my Panasonic Gm5, which I know to be less sensitive to Uv. And again tonight it was 5 stops less sensitive than the Olympus E510. I ask as I bought this camera to convert to full spectrum, but now that I am more interested in the lower wavelengths, I wonder if I should. I have to test it, but the Em1 was reported as being 10Ev less sensitive to Ir: http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/m43/em1.1-ir.html Thus using the internal Ir filter to help against IR leakage and the ok uv sensitivity, I don't think it make sense to convert it. Unless people saw better than 2ev response after a reputable conversion. Any thoughts please. Thank you.

Hello. I do have APC-C full spectrum modified mirrorless camera I use for photography but I not like it for several reasons. DSLR/mirrorless camera‘s are bulky and heavy, require more expensive and larger lens and filters, are limited to factory software which gets eventually outdated. Sure bigger sensor/pixels and fast aperture lens camera‘s will still rival over phones especially in low light conditions as well for having viewfinders, screw in filters and hoods but I can‘t just carry bulky camera everywhere I go, when for example exercising, hiking and traveling. Somewhere I saw good quote: best camera is which you have available when it‘s needed. And there are rare, unpredictable moments to take that amazing shot. I researched many currently released phone camera‘s to find out which of them have biggest sensor/individual pixel sizes, fastest lens, fitting color filter arrays or monochrome sensors, wide range of ISO settings, as well quite recent technology such as pixel binning, multiple camera combination for higher dynamic range and sentivity or great optical zoom, PDAF/laser focus. Also display quality and overall hardare quality, operating system was important factor. If someone would be interested I could send you list of phone camera specs I made in 2019, currently there are of course new improoved phones camera‘s released. Of all of them Huawei P20 PRO to my mind is most interesting due to these reasons: 1) It has tripple camera system: main one 40 MP, f/1.8, 27mm (wide), sensor size 1/1.78" and pixel size 1.55μm, second 8MP 80mm telephoto f/2.4, sensor 1/4" and third one 20MP monochrome f/1.6, 27 mm, sensor size 1/2.7", pixel size: 1 μm. 2) Monochrome sensor is much more sensitive to visible light and significantly to shorter UV rays, IR sensitivity is also a bit better since green/blue filters block some of the NIR spectrum. 3) Pixel binning. When using pixel binning resolution is reduced by four. Although I have seen reports that low resolution sensors are still more sensitive than high resolution binned sensors due to photodetector deeper wells which able to capture more energy (as well there were reports deeper wells allow to detect longer IR wavelengths, can A7S do it?). There are camera’s that can combine even more pixels like for example Samsung Galaxy 20 Ultra which can use even 9 pixels but since it has ridiculously high 108MP resolution pixels are only 0.8 μm big. 4) Lens are pretty fast however later Huawei P30 PRO phone main camera has even faster f/1.6 lens. Honor 20 PRO has fastest known phone lens with record aperture of f/1.4 what it makes interesting to use it for modification of Huawei camera. Lens are made by German Leica company which probably produces sharpest and highest quality lens in the world. Although they are made not from glass but plastic which spectral transmission is unknown to me. AR coatings and optical cement might also block UV but to know for sure tests must be done. 5) ISO ranges from 50 to whooping 102400 what is useful for low light imaging when there is no time for long exposures. I want to turn this phone into night vision device to work with my powerful 830-850nm LED lamp so high ISO noise is not so much an issue. There are Apps which can overdrive sensitivity even to higher levels. I’m curious if it would be possible cool phone camera sensor for better signal to noise ratio? 6) Android is most popular OS and has highest diversity of Apps available. Also wide selection external USB devices and cameras can be connected to phone via micro USB port. I saw there was even full frame camera that could be connected to phone but it’s expensive, maybe someone can recommend big sensor low cost USB camera? I noticed also phone LWIR thermal camera’s with great specs are less costly. 7) High resolution, contrast and brightness OLED 90hz display. Phone display can be turned into viewfinder with VR glasses or monocular adapter. 8) Huawei P20 Pro is premium phone but over time it’s price had dropped significantly. Also camera modules are easy to access without risking breaking OLED display and are cheap to replace in case of failed modification. Sure there also other good phone camera‘s. Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium has biggest and fastest lens monochrome camera, as well highest video ISO. Panasonic Lumix Smart Camera CM1 and Nokia 808 pure view have biggest sensors among the phones but they use not backlit BSI CMOS or are outdated. HTC phones known for biggest pixels but have low resolution. Nokia 9 PureView went in different path by using unique 5 camera design where three of them are monochrome. And lastly Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra and Huawei P40 Pro have biggest sensors of all modern phones, too bad they lack B/W camera. Huawei P40 Pro has 1/1.28" size sensor and 2.44µm pixel size what makes it most sensitive phone camera to date. In theory it’s possible to remove CFA from sensor but from my experience its very risky operation and microlens would be lost (if they are still used), I could not remove Bayer filter from some sensors at all although I might try using stronger solvents. Any idea if it would be possible to do such modifications with Huawei P40 Pro? Modifications I want to do are to change hot mirror in monochrome camera to UV pass/IR cut filter since it‘s best suited for UV photography. Main p20 PRO camera would be used for VIS/IR photography with sliding IR-cut filter. I also want to change lens in main camera and maybe monochrome also to Leica f/1.4 what would significantly increase light gathering. I‘m not sure what field this lens actually covers and if it would produce vignetting on 1/1.78" (14.27mm) sensor, it‘s designed for 1/2" or 12.7mm sensor but I think there might be little room left to avoid edge blur/vignette. I had idea to add external mount for M12 lens which apertures can go as wide as f/0.95 but I prefer to use quality Leica lens which hopefully could fit inside phone and provide autofocus. Most phones today use plastic lens however LG V30 phone is exception that uses f/1.6 glass lens which might have better UV transmission but I have no any idea of their transmission capabilities. Some incredible engineering went into squizing as large as possible sensors and wide aperture as well great zoom lens to maximize versatility of camera‘s in such thin phone design. In near future novel technology might be used such as graphene based CMOS sensors reported to be 10 times more sensitive than current silicon sensors with super broad spectral response from visible, infrared and reaching even terahertz range. Lens could be made as thin as 600 nm and flat with entirelly different metalens which focus whole spectrum into one spot thus having no chromatic abberation and requiring less lens elements. Such technology could even make traditional photocamera‘s obsolete at least for most users.

I went to a local zoo yesterday and took some comparison shots in IR and UV. UV-shots with a Canon EOS 6D, converted to monochrome ([Edit:]Bayer-array removed[Edit]) "almost"-UV (by LDP LLC, so have to use one additional filter [Edit:] internal filter is X-Nite 330, external filter X-Nite BP1[Edit]), lens Russian MC 3M-5CA 500mm f/8 mirror lens. ISO 3200-6400, shutter-speed 1/125 for the camel, 1/30 s for the rest. I forgot to bring my monopod and need to practice more with that lens, so the sharpness is not anything to brag about, on top of which I really do need to clean my sensor, but here they go. In that order: Aloof camel, hungry mini-pony, sleeping lion, watchful serval, active llama, itchy Angus-bull.

I've been exploring the world of microscopy more recently, and of course wanted to do some UV microscope images. The image below is a sunscreen product - an oil in water emulsion, with the UV absorbing ingredient in the oil phase - on a microscope slide, lit with a Xe lamp and imaged with a UV converted Nikon d810 camera. Overall magnification about 400x, so the oil droplets start at under a micron in diameter. The oil droplets contain the sunscreen, hence look dark. I've written up more about it here - https://jmcscientificconsulting.com/uv-microscopy-of-sunscreen-formulations/ - including a rather funky UV video of when the emulsion collapses and the oil droplets fuse together, filmed at ISO 10,000... Logistically it was not easy to do - the microscope needed supporting on a lab jack, to get the light port up to the same height as the output from my lamp. Cue the health and safety violations.....

Hi, hopefully no one already posted this. I casually found a sensor which should be able to detect from visible light up to soft X-Rays (maybe even some hard X-Rays, since it goes up to 30 KeV). I don’t know how expensive it is (probably a lot) but just know that it exists. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=11&ved=2ahUKEwiGiczR-p7oAhXo-SoKHcDNDbEQFjAKegQIBhAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.princetoninstruments.com%2Fproducts%2FSOPHIA-XO-xray-cameras&usg=AOvVaw0tNCCjkuY0hr0vfGBNXKFs Look at the purple line. (I think that the image will be huge, I’m trying to upload from my iPad).

Hi: I have a full-spectrum modified pentax K01 camera. I tried to take some UV flower pictures with two cheap Chinese UV pass + IR stacking filters and a SMC pentax DFA100 macro lens. I was be able to capture few "UV" (maybe not real UV) pictures with filters+lens but it was difficult because my SMC pentax 100mm lens is not an UV-capable lens. I wanted to buy an UV filter from the Ebay seller: UVIRoptic. He recommended to buy an UV capable lens first before invest money on an UV pass filter. I've checked all the pentax UV capable lenses listed here, and I am not sure which one I should get. So have anyone tested "early Asahi Opt. Macro-takumar 50mm F4 lens" for UV photography? Thank you. An example of the "UV" flower picture that I took, Roundleaf Ragwort (Packera obovata) ISO 200, f5.6, Bulb exposure 10 s. (sorry I don't know how to post a picture here). https://photos.app.goo.gl/2jrGd25T5G7PDV7q9

Maybe these Pros & Cons would be useful to beginners? Although I must say that there is no predicting what UV gear is appealing to a beginner! Some beginners just want to experiment and don't want to spend much, but other beginners have certain goals in mind and need to match a certain level of image quality. Please do mention any other Pros or Cons and I will add them. Later I will link this post in the Stickies. Of course, as always, comments welcomed !! And please let me know of any errors or typos. The sensor quality comments are mostly about dynamic range, noise and high ISO capability. Please take this in stride - you can have an average sensor and still obtain a very good image from it with proper attention to exposure and lighting. Expenses Associated with a UV-Capable Camera The Camera. Of course. Conversion fee. Unless you go with one of the old Nikons, you will need to convert the camera. Lens mount adapter to fit camera. Unless you have a Nikon body and can find a UV-capable F-mount lens, you will need to buy a lens adapter to fit your camera's mount. Old Nikon D70, D70S, D40 I would include here as a shadow list such cameras as the Nikon D40S/70S, D50/60/80/90, D200/300 all of which would have the same Pros & Cons list except that these cameras must be converted. Pros: Cheap & plentiful. No conversion fee. These bodies have fairly weak internal UV/IR blocking filters which will pass enough UV to make a photo under good UV illumination. Cons: Discontinued (old). Support for parts and repair may be lacking. No Live View. You must focus before mounting UV-pass filter, then re-adjust focus to compensate for focus shift between UV and Visible wavelengths. Old Nikons have fair to average sensors capability relative to the most recent top-of-the-line excellent sensors. Long flange focal distance. If you want to focus to infinity, you must find a UV-capable lens which has an FFD longer than 46.5mm. This rules out many of the cheaper, simply constructed 35/3.5 lenses. Lens adapters may be required. If you can find an EL-Nikkor or Nikon E-series, you won't need an adapter. Discontinued Panasonic Lumix G (µ4/3) or Sony Nex Andrea writes an opinion: In spite of the fact that you will need to pay a conversion fee to use one of these cameras for UV photography, I think the benefits of Live View (with sufficient UV illumination) and a short flange focal distance make these cameras the best inexpensive choice for those who do not wish to invest a lot of money in UV gear. As always, my opinion is only my opinion and YMMV. :) Pros: Cheap & plentiful. Live View. However --- be aware that sufficiently strong sunlight or a UV torch may be required in order to make good use of Live View in UV. Video. Short flange focal distance. Lumix has an FFD of 19.25mm. Nex has an FFD of 18mm. There are probably more lens choices available for a camera with a shorter FFD. If you are particularly interested in infinity focus (landscapes), this could be important for you. Cons: Discontinued. Support for parts and repair may be lacking. Conversion fee. These bodies must have their strong internal UV/IR blocking filters removed. Lens adapters usually required. Older Lumix have average sensor capability relative to the most recent top-of-the-line excellent sensors. Older Nex have good sensor capability relative to the most recent top-of-the-line excellent sensors. Discontinued Nikon D or Pentax K with Live View These two camera lines have been well-known for good image quality, so I am separating from the preceding list. They will tend to be a little more expensive than discontinued Lumix or Nex bodies. Pentax is often overlooked as a UV camera but there are quite a lot of M42 UV-capable lenses available for use with a K-to-M42 lens mount adapter. Pros: Reasonably priced and easy to find. Of the two, you can probably get a discontinued Pentax for a little less than a Nikon. Live View. However --- be aware that sufficiently strong sunlight or a UV torch may be required in order to make good use of Live View in UV. Video. Many M42 UV-capable lens choices for Pentax. Cons: Discontinued. Support for parts and repair may be lacking. Conversion fee. These bodies must have their strong internal UV/IR blocking filters removed. Lens adapters sometimes required for Nikon, usually required for Pentax. Good sensors relative to the most recent top-of-the-line excellent sensors. Canon DSLRs for UV Photography We simply do not have enough information to make any Pros/Cons list for Canon DSLRs. The generally prevailing rumor is that the Canon sensor is less UV-capable. However, I have yet to see any tests or measurements done with a converted Canon DSLR which is why I use the 'rumor' label. See UPDATE below. We would welcome any links that anyone finds on the use of a converted Canon DSLR for UV photography. We do have one member who shoots successfully from all appearances with a converted Canon DSLR, so we hope to gain more insight from their work. UPDATE: OK - in addition to our member Ahr's use of a Canon 20D for UV, we have this link found by Alex H. to the use of a Canon Rebel 3Ti (aka 600d) for UV by the Australian photographer MickeyJ: http://blogs.msmvps..../#comment-47430. And here is a YouTube link to a converted Canon EOS: https://www.youtube....?v=o9BqrSAHbTc. I think we can lay rumors to rest about Canon's being unsuitable for broadband conversion. Olympus µ4/3 for UV Photography Again I don't have enough information to make a Pros/Cons list. But we have one good example of an Olympus µ4/3 camera converted to broadband by Boon Tang. Here is a link to his photography blog where he posts UV photos made with his converted Olympus E-PM1: http://myphotojourney.co.uk/ Best Image Quality in UV Photography The best sensor produces the best UV photograph just as it would for Visible photography. Working in Ultraviolight light adds some complications to image making. There is not much UV in sunlight even on a bright sunny day, so you will almost always need to supplement sunlight with some UV flash. Even then UV exposures will likely be longer and very often noisier than their Visible counterparts. There are a lot of strong shadow and highlight contrasts in most UV scenes. To combat UV's noise, blocked shadows and blown highlights it is very useful to have a converted camera whose sensor has a wide dynamic range and excellent high ISO capability. The Pentax K5, Nikon D610 or Sony A7 are just three examples of such cameras with excellent image capability. There are many more. Because the shorter UV wavelengths reveal more detail in most scenes, it is nice, but certainly not necessary, to use a converted camera with a larger number of megapixels. Your choice there would be made the same way you would make it for Visible photography - more MP is good if you are printing large. Otherwise, don't worry about it.

Seems like experimental sensors are hitting the market faster than I ever would have thought. Rising camera, a Chinese microscopy and Astrophotography camera manufacturer got back to my questions about a different camera, with this suggestion. https://www.ebay.com/itm/high-sensitivity-USB3-0-4-2mp-1-2-Monochrome-Digital-UV-ultraviolet-camera/124065525412?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160727114228%26meid%3D9b108a431eb04309ada18661c4122853%26pid%3D100290%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D4%26sd%3D124065525412%26itm%3D124065525412%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2060778&_trksid=p2060778.c100290.m3507 Only $5800, but uses the GSENSE2020BSI sensor I saw in the senor blog announced in last December 2019. This is the sensor specifications: https://gpixel.com/products/area-scan-en/gsense2020bsi/ Thats right 60% QE at 250nm. Its only 4Mega pixels though.

I broke a carton of eggs. So thought why not boil a couple still mostly intact eggs and see if I can see if there is a UV-C threshold. In that protein will absorb at 280nm, but backbone will absorb at 230nm. So if I can see below 230nm with my new filter, I am hoping for it to look all black. Using single Germicidal 15W bulb with KSS 60mm f4 lens and UV imager. 193bp20 filter: 253bp25 filter: Using two UVB 200 Exoterra 26 W bulbs with KSS 60mm f4 lens and UV imager. 303bp10 with 2mm U340 filter to cut down back reflection (UVB Exoterra bulb emits 302nm Mercury line only for first 12 minutes after turning on): 313bp25: 335bp10: 370bp15: 390bp25 405bp10 Visible reference image: Using my full spectrum converted EM1 I took the following using the two ExoTerra 200 26W bulbs 313bp25 with 330WB80 improved filter: Baader venus filter: Switching lights to two 365nm LED bulbs with 1.9mm ZWB1 filters to block all visible leak (these do work, no 405nm line detected) Baader Venus U Filter: UV/Visible with just a 2mm S8612: UV induced visible fluorescence with Sigma SD15 block filter on camera lens: UV induced visible and UV Induced IR fluorescence with just Tiffen 2A filter on camera lens: UV induced IR fluorescence with LP 720 filter on camera: 405nm induced IR fluorescence with LP 720 filter on camera: 2.2mm BG39 on White LED bulb induced IR fluorescence with LP 720 filter on camera: Hallogen bulb used for IR with LP 720 filter on camera: