UV on unmodded toy camera (Instax mini EVO)

[KaJashey]

I have an Instax mini EVO that brings me some joy. It is a $200 hybrid camera that has a real cheap digital camera on the front and an instax mini printer on the back. Prints lots of family keepsakes and little pictures. Print lots of life as it is.

 

The built-in UV/IR cut seems really weak. I can hold a 720nm or 850nm filter infront of the camera and take an IR picture. At 850nm there is a big hotspot and the picture is awful. at 720nm something is wrong and the picture is a little pinhole like, the edges are real soft.

 

I designed up a press fit filter adapter for the camera. https://www.printables.com/model/291011-instax-mini-evo-52mm-filter-adapter

 

The camera doesn't have sophisticated WB controls or RAW support. The following are just two photo are straight out of camera. The red one is with a 720nm filter and the purple pink one is with a ZWB3 filter. I get a similar pink sky look if I use a LaLaU filter by UVIROptics - and that filter doesn't leak IR. 

 

I think I may be well able to resolve some big reflected UV feature like a sunflower spot with the camera. Not great detailed pictures but possible and fun. 

 

 

 

[dabateman]

Interesting. 

Are you sure the ZWB3 image is with a ZWB3 filter only? I would expect IR whitish yellow trees and blue sky. If thats filter only than you have quite a lot of IR blocking and maybe 385nm cut for UV.

I play with instax film occasionally.  The Fujifilm 50S can sinc and print directly to a printer I have.

I also have other cameras that directly work with instax film.

 

[colinbm]

Reminds me of my early days of IR & UV shooting.

[KaJashey]

1 hour ago, dabateman said:

Interesting. 

Are you sure the ZWB3 image is with a ZWB3 filter only? I would expect IR whitish yellow trees and blue sky. If thats filter only than you have quite a lot of IR blocking and maybe 385nm cut for UV...

 

 

Yes was the ZWB3 alone. If you were doing filter over naked eye you would see purple sky red trees.

 

I'm gonna try my uv pass only filter. I didn't use it today because I didn't have an interesting sky. 

 

IR white trees and deep blue sky are from a ZWB3 and a camera you can white balance with. That's the look I bought the ZWB3 filter for

[dabateman]

Yes sorry I wasn't clear. The ZWB3 filter lets in a boat load of IR. For your trees to be dark and not IR reflective in that shot, I would assume that a lot of that IR that should be reflected off those trees is blocked. So thus I assume some UV passage and more IR blocking.

But I don't know how you exposed the shot. The trees might just not be exposed correctly,  to recover your sky and clouds. So I maybe completely wrong in my assumption.

[KaJashey]

1 hour ago, dabateman said:

...The ZWB3 filter lets in a boat load of IR. For your trees to be dark and not IR reflective in that shot, I would assume that a lot of that IR that should be reflected off those trees is blocked...

 

It's a dark photo and the camera is amplifying whatever it can to show something. I think the sky is just overpowering. It could be even darker foliage and I think I saw darker folage with the LaLa U but didn't take a picture yet because it was uninteresting.

[KaJashey]

Wanted a purer UV picture with this camera. They skies were not interesting or I was at work for a while now. I get the feeling that sky is all I'm gonna see on a pure UV photo with this camera. Today was a darker rainy day but I had some blue sky polk through the clouds so I chased it and got some photos. 

 

Here is the photo - Taken with a LaLaU filter, "Saved for web" via Photoshop at 50% quality to conserve space on my account and because there isn't much detail anyway. Blue skys maps out to the hottest hot pink areas on the photo. The purple cloud was dark grey visually.

[colinbm]

The magenta is usually an indication of overexposure.
UV photos are dark by there very nature.