Alex H Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Enrico had already announced about existence of this filter in his post here: http://www.ultraviol...celab-u-filter/ And here is the link to the sellers web page: http://www.primaluce...-uv-filter.html I also recently recieved this filter and tested it for pictorial UV-photography, despite scarce sun and strong northern winds. Here are few first pictures, all shot with full-spectum NEX-6 and Leitz Focotar-2 50mm lens. http://www.holovachov.com/img/s11/v35/p1449153765.jpg http://www.holovachov.com/img/s12/v170/p1449153799.jpg http://www.holovachov.com/img/s11/v30/p1449153863.jpg http://www.holovachov.com/img/s7/v152/p1449153891.jpg http://www.holovachov.com/img/s7/v153/p1449154075.jpg http://www.holovachov.com/img/s11/v37/p1449154154.jpg http://www.holovachov.com/img/s11/v36/p1449154443.jpg http://www.holovachov.com/img/s11/v29/p1449154468.jpg As you can see falce colours produced with it are different from what we used to get with Baader-U2, but I really like how this filter works with some subjects. I think it will be great for artistic UV-photography and I am going to experiment with it more in the nearest future and update this thread with new pictures. Link to comment
nfoto Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Alex, do you have any information of the exposure time of your shots compared to say the Baader U? Link to comment
Alex H Posted September 8, 2015 Author Share Posted September 8, 2015 Hi Bjørn, I did not compare both filters directly. I was mostly interested in its pictorial qualities.EXIF data is present in the pictures i posted.The first shot was done with F/8, ISO 200, exposure 2 sec.Other shots were done with F/5.6, ISO 1600, exposure ranging between 1/20th to 1/40 second. Link to comment
colinbm Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Very interesting to see Alex, I like the blues.What CWB did you do please ?Does the Leitz Focotar-2 50mm lens, pass all this filters band pass ?Col Link to comment
Alex H Posted September 8, 2015 Author Share Posted September 8, 2015 What CWB did you do please ? WB was different for different shots, plus additional edits in Photoshop Does the Leitz Focotar-2 50mm lens, pass all this filters band pass ? No Link to comment
colinbm Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Thanks AlexIt will be interesting to see a UV sparticle test with this full range on a camera capable of recording this range.I hope this guy gets a 50.8mm version out, I'll have to save & wait, & get some shorter then 340nm narrow band filters to add to my sparticle.Col Link to comment
enricosavazzi Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Thanks AlexIt will be interesting to see a UV sparticle test with this full range on a camera capable of recording this range.I hope this guy gets a 50.8mm version out, I'll have to save & wait, & get some shorter then 340nm narrow band filters to add to my sparticle.ColThere is already a 2" (50.8 mm) version available on the PrimaLuceLab web site, which I purchased. The diameter of the glass itself (after removing it from the filter mount) is 45.9 mm, so it cannot be remounted in a 52 mm filter ring like I did with other 2" filters. Link to comment
Alex H Posted September 9, 2015 Author Share Posted September 9, 2015 2" version is out of stock right now. Link to comment
colinbm Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Thanks Enrico & AlexSo the glass size is the same as the BaaderU2 ?Col Link to comment
Alex H Posted September 12, 2015 Author Share Posted September 12, 2015 Andrea or Bjørn, could you please move off-topic posts into separate discussion with appropriate title. More example pictures: http://www.holovachov.com/img/s11/v3/p1449154041.jpg http://www.holovachov.com/img/s12/v173/p1432206943.jpg http://www.holovachov.com/img/s6/v141/p1449153781.jpg Link to comment
Andrea B. Posted October 4, 2015 Share Posted October 4, 2015 Yes, Alex I will tidy this up as I work through the new posts. "-) Link to comment
Alex H Posted October 6, 2015 Author Share Posted October 6, 2015 Prima Luce Lab filter fits well this particular step-down ring: eBay item 250917621842 Link to comment
colinbm Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Thanks AlexDo you mean that the 2" astro filters, screw into this 48mm thread ?Col Link to comment
Alex H Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 Colin, this is exactly what I mean: 2" Prima Luce Lab filter fits well this particular step-down ring: eBay item 250917621842 Nothing more than that. Link to comment
Alaun Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 The thread is different from our M48,M49 or M52 mm "normal" filters (I think, it is also mentioned on the Primaluce site). I found a M52mm holder of a macro adapter lens, where it fit in perfectly (filter plus frame) and I just glued it there with some drops of glue: uploading a picture I got internal server error Link to comment
Alaun Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 And two pictures one with the PL and one with Baader U both OOC (Panasonic GH3UVIR, and 105mm UV-Nikkor &SB14flash) Link to comment
Alaun Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 and two more OOC with the PL (same setting as above) Link to comment
Alaun Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 This is an old threat, but I got some more pictures with the PrimLuce recently, now with the D810uvir and again with the UV-Nikkor. Processed with Photo Ninja and PSCC. All taken hand held.It seems this filter cuts a bit more of the blue around 400nm compared to the Baader U and maybe it leaks a tiny bit of IR. Link to comment
ulf Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 I have the PrimaLuce UV filter too. It is interesting for artistic IR leaky-type of UV-images. IMHO the IR-leakage isn't that tiny.I measured the transmission and OD in IR is between 2 and 3: I tried to tame it without limiting the shorter end too much by stacking it with a B-410, but it wasn't enough to kill the leakage.B-410 has a deeper UV transmission cutoff than S8612 or BG-type filters. Unfortunately I have not kept any of the test images. Link to comment
enricosavazzi Posted May 20, 2019 Share Posted May 20, 2019 I have the PrimaLuce UV filter too. It is interesting for artistic IR leaky-type of UV-images. IMHO the IR-leakage isn't that tiny.I measured the transmission and OD in IR is between 2 and 3:[...]I happened to update my web page on the PrimaLuceLab U recently, but had not seen the last couple of posts. See in particular the updated part about the Optolong Venus U filter, which may be the same as the (now apparently discontinued) PrimaLuceLab U:http://savazzi.net/photography/primalucelab_u.html The linear transmission graph at https://www.optolong.com/en/products/astronomy-filters/light-pollution-filters/343-broadband-filter-venus-u seems to agree with Ulf's log graph of the PrimaLuceLab U in the preceding post. Looking again at the test pictures on my page, I strongly suspect that the washed-out false-blue in some of the tests is at least in part a NIR leak. They look like the NIR leaks I have seen in some of my U340-10 filters like the Thorlabs one. Link to comment
ulf Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 Enrico, When looking at your images of the PrimaLuceLab U, I see an important difference compared to how my filter look.My filter is just coated only on one side. The coating has the same copper colour. The opposite side is uncoated showing the black ionic glass substrate. I think your filter has less IR-leakage than mine, due to the second dichroic coated face. I remember that the foliage had a much more intense blue tone in my images, just as some images earlier in this topic. Link to comment
enricosavazzi Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 It seems that there are two versions of the PrimaLuceLab U, the one with different dielectric coatings on either side that I got, and the one without dielectric coatings on one side (or perhaps just AR coating on this side) that you got. Possibly the missing coating on one side helps to reflect NIR, which might be the reason why yours may have a more pronounced NIR leak. It would be interesting to hear from other owners of this filter (Alex for example) which of the two variants they got. It is of course not a good thing that this filter is/was sold in two different versions without any information on this being disclosed by the seller or maker. Skipping the coatings on one side of course makes the filter cheaper to make, but probably not worth it if it means a significantly poorer performance with respect to our use of the filter. I can find only one picture of one side of the Optolong Venus U, so we don't know whether this one also has dielectric coatings on only one side. Its price appears to have been cut on the PrimaluceLab web site ( https://www.primaluc...ltraviolet.html ), but has this been done by compromising on its performance? This filter appears to be made in China, which as a whole is not a good sign given our experiences with Chinese filters. The Asahi Spectra XRR0340 ( http://www.savazzi.n...ml#asahispectra ) has dielectric coating on only one side, but this does not prevent it from having a higher NIR rejection. It also largely cuts off the 370-400 nm band, so it gives monochromatic (false yellow) results with most subjects. Its price is much higher though (the 25 mm size costs almost the same as the 2" PrimaLuceLab U and Optolong Venus U). Link to comment
enricosavazzi Posted May 29, 2019 Share Posted May 29, 2019 I had a chance to try again the PrimaLuceLab U in the field, this time with full spectrum Sony Alpha 7 II and CoastalOpt 60 mm Apo.Edit: To make it clear, the version of PrimaLuceLab that I used for the following pictures is the one with dielectric coatings on both sides (one side copper-colored, the other side gray). First an example of the custom white balance I used, which I set with the Baader U. This picture is also taken with the Baader U: With the same white balance and the PrimaLuceLab U. The tonality is almost exclusively false yellow: Things change if the subject includes a large portion of green plants. This forces a longer auto exposure (the camera is trying to expose for the very UV-dark foliage): I suspect that much of this false green is NIR contamination. So it really depends mostly on which subject we are shooting. The NIR contamination does not seem to be important, unless the subject is largely green vegetation, which reflects little NUV but a lot of NIR. PS - This can be verified by enhancing the green channel of images and changing the overall color balance to better distinguish the green areas, which reveals that the false green is indeed already present in underexposed areas, and therefore not immediately obvious: Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now