This land was ravaged by... IR version
Posted 23/09/2011 - 09:05
Link
I just love these IR photos you have been posting. As someone new to this technique, how do your modified camera photos compare with using an IR filter? Not much on the web about IR.
I'd love to try some myself, but don't have a spare body to be modified. I thought about getting a R72 filter, but don't know how well these work.
Your pictures are just stunning. My daughter's boyfriend's mum is a Goth and a photographer. She's blown away by the graveyard photos you posted before.
I'd love to try some myself, but don't have a spare body to be modified. I thought about getting a R72 filter, but don't know how well these work.
Your pictures are just stunning. My daughter's boyfriend's mum is a Goth and a photographer. She's blown away by the graveyard photos you posted before.
Posted 23/09/2011 - 09:18
Link
milamber wrote:
I just love these IR photos you have been posting. As someone new to this technique, how do your modified camera photos compare with using an IR filter?
As it happens I've written a couple of articles on the subject which will hopefully be put up soon for Plus members to see.I just love these IR photos you have been posting. As someone new to this technique, how do your modified camera photos compare with using an IR filter?
In brief though the effect is the same whether the filter is on the lens or the sensor, but the normal body contains a filter which blocks IR. On the older bodies such as the *ist series it is just possible to use a weak IR filter such as the R72 and get hand-held results. On the later bodies (K10D onwards) the blocking is much stronger, so a tripod is definitely required. That implies all sorts of inconvenience with moving foliage, clouds etc.
The modified camera gives the exposures as above, or as in aliengroves remarkable mountain pictures from yesterday.
milamber wrote:
My daughter's boyfriend's mum is a Goth and a photographer. She's blown away by the graveyard photos you posted before.
I'd better do some more then!
My daughter's boyfriend's mum is a Goth and a photographer. She's blown away by the graveyard photos you posted before.
Posted 23/09/2011 - 09:37
Link
Technically I don't know what you're talking about and have lots to learn before I even want to know. Both pictures are great but the later one really made me shiver - as if someone had just walked over my grave.
K5 + 18-135mm kit lens
Posted 23/09/2011 - 09:43
Link
Frankie wrote:
Technically I don't know what you're talking about and have lots to learn before I even want to know. Both pictures are great but the later one really made me shiver - as if someone had just walked over my grave.
Always aiming to please Technically I don't know what you're talking about and have lots to learn before I even want to know. Both pictures are great but the later one really made me shiver - as if someone had just walked over my grave.
In spite of the apparent bleakness of the scene it was actually very pleasant warm hazy sunshine, although the bushes do look a bit poorly.
Posted 23/09/2011 - 09:45
Link
karma mechanic wrote:
In brief though the effect is the same whether the filter is on the lens or the sensor, but the normal body contains a filter which blocks IR. On the older bodies such as the *ist series it is just possible to use a weak IR filter such as the R72 and get hand-held results. On the later bodies (K10D onwards) the blocking is much stronger, so a tripod is definitely required. That implies all sorts of inconvenience with moving foliage, clouds etc.
Thanks. I have a K-r so subject matter with a R72 will be quite limited. I might try it if I can get one cheaply or save up the pennies for one of your mods.
milamber wrote:
I just love these IR photos you have been posting. As someone new to this technique, how do your modified camera photos compare with using an IR filter?
As it happens I've written a couple of articles on the subject which will hopefully be put up soon for Plus members to see.I just love these IR photos you have been posting. As someone new to this technique, how do your modified camera photos compare with using an IR filter?
In brief though the effect is the same whether the filter is on the lens or the sensor, but the normal body contains a filter which blocks IR. On the older bodies such as the *ist series it is just possible to use a weak IR filter such as the R72 and get hand-held results. On the later bodies (K10D onwards) the blocking is much stronger, so a tripod is definitely required. That implies all sorts of inconvenience with moving foliage, clouds etc.
Posted 23/09/2011 - 09:49
Link
Much more dramatic than the first time you went there - though that was also a dramatic photo befitting such a statement in stone.
Wonderful. I am really enjoying your IR photos.
Wonderful. I am really enjoying your IR photos.
Posted 23/09/2011 - 10:08
Link
milamber wrote:
Thanks. I have a K-r so subject matter with a R72 will be quite limited. I might try it if I can get one cheaply or save up the pennies for one of your mods.
Once I've found another body to convert I'm planning on selling the GX1L that was used for my earlier shots, it will be via the For Sale section on here. Not sure of price - probably something like £150 on top of the nominal body cost for these older ones. Does that sound reasonable?
Thanks. I have a K-r so subject matter with a R72 will be quite limited. I might try it if I can get one cheaply or save up the pennies for one of your mods.
Posted 23/09/2011 - 10:46
Link
Brilliant shot - I love it. Great stone too.
Why would you only put your article up for Plus members ? Is anyone paying for it ? And if not I can't see why you would do that and deny the proletariate (not that I have any imminent plans for IR but I just found that comment a little strange. Fine if people are willing to pay you for your efforts though).
Why would you only put your article up for Plus members ? Is anyone paying for it ? And if not I can't see why you would do that and deny the proletariate (not that I have any imminent plans for IR but I just found that comment a little strange. Fine if people are willing to pay you for your efforts though).
http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0
Posted 23/09/2011 - 14:44
Link
Pentaxophile wrote:
Great image. Does that stone commemorate the highway's engineers who planned the motorway? It's slightly Ian Hamilton Finlay-esque.
Only if they were in the Thatcher cabinet
Great image. Does that stone commemorate the highway's engineers who planned the motorway? It's slightly Ian Hamilton Finlay-esque.
Posted 23/09/2011 - 15:52
Link
tyronet2000 wrote:
Would a filter be ok on a *ist DL2
Regards
The DS, DL and DL2 are your best bet for using an R72 in sunshine hand-held. See this competition entry from before I converted the GX1L (DL2 equivalent). A tripod would be handy but not essential, although seeing through even the R72 filter is very difficult so you can compose on a tripod and then attach the filter.
Would a filter be ok on a *ist DL2
Regards
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.


574 posts
18 years
Hampshire,
UK
I was up there yesterday testing the converted K20D on the big sky, so I took a different view of it in IR. A Terminator-style landscape comes to mind. So much easier...
Modified K20D, Sigma 10-20mm at 10mm, 1/90th at f/6.7, ISO 200. No extra treatment except boosting contrast and detail with Topaz Adjust, these are black and white straight out of the camera.
Also on 500px