Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 22, 2009, 7:42 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default Mountains 100 miles away

I occasionally go to a spot near where I live and gaze across the San Joaquin Valley to the Sierras. Normally they are just a vague lighter blue line on the horizon, sticking up out of the clouds/haze of the valley. I've tried taking pictures with a 300mm lens and haven't had much success. So today I went out with the K100 and the R72 filter. I was pleased with what I managed, even though the longest lens I can use is 100mm (the Viv 105 macro).



I also got decent pictures with the kit lens, too. It's making me think that it might be worth it for me to get the K100 converted - it would be fun to use all of my lenses, not just the few that I have step-up rings for.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 22, 2009, 7:54 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
John.Pattullo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 613
Default

i thought that was snow to begin with =) - very interesting use of IR filter to cut through the haze and since you have the k7 it certainly wouldn't be unreasonable to convert the k100 but think its pretty expensive proposition

anyway nice shot! keep em coming
__________________
Flickr
PENTAX K-5 & PENTAX K-7
Pentax-DA 12-24mm f4 | Pentax-DA* 16-50mm f2.8 | Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 | Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro | Pentax-DA* 60-250mm f4 | Sigma 150-500mm
Pentax Photo Gallery
John.Pattullo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2009, 8:18 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Trojansoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 3,724
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtngal View Post

I also got decent pictures with the kit lens, too. It's making me think that it might be worth it for me to get the K100 converted - it would be fun to use all of my lenses, not just the few that I have step-up rings for.
Very cool photo, Harriet. What do you mean when you say you might get the K100 "converted?" Are there lenses that will not work on it? I have recently gotten a K100, (I let my son have my K10 to give him more flexibility, and I got his K100 in return) but I haven't had time to fool with it at all.

Paul
Trojansoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2009, 8:23 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
John.Pattullo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 613
Default

i think she means converted for near ir work - basically the the pull off the Hot pass?? well the filer that cuts out ir from getting to the sensor and replace it with and ir filter

means you can look through the viewfinder and see things normall and take a picture jsut like normal but will record near IR rather than visible light - and no long exposures either

they also sometimes adjust the autofocus to work better with the ;onger wavelengths so its more accurate for ir
__________________
Flickr
PENTAX K-5 & PENTAX K-7
Pentax-DA 12-24mm f4 | Pentax-DA* 16-50mm f2.8 | Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 | Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro | Pentax-DA* 60-250mm f4 | Sigma 150-500mm
Pentax Photo Gallery
John.Pattullo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2009, 9:06 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi Harriet,

I've been enjoying your ventures into the IR Zone. I've done a little, but as you know, I'm not much of a landscape shooter (and there's not really that much exciting landscape to shoot here in the Midwest), so it's just been a little, and probably not even enough to justify the cost of the Hoya R72.

Might not be a practical solution, but I really like the Panasonic FZ1 for IR work. The IR filter is about as weak as you can find on a digital camera, it's got Mega OIS, and the FL range is obviously pretty extensive, being an Ultrazoom (35-420 EQ). It focuses well through the filter, and you actually see the scene as it will be captured with the EVF. They should be pretty cheap on the used market, and IQ is very good for 2MP, mostly because of the excellent little lens. You could still use the K100 for wide angle work (under 35mm EQ), and still have it as a very small and light travel DLSR.

. . .just a thought. . .

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2009, 9:51 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Paul - as John said, I was referring to converting the K100 for IR use by pulling the anti-IR filter out so you can only use the camera for infrared photography. But since the camera works well with the R72 filter, I'll probably not spend the money.

At the moment I have a 55mm R72 filter and step up rings for 52 and 49. I actually bought the wrong filter - I didn't check the size of the 55-300 lens before I ordered the filter (dumb!) and it's actually too small for it. So I limit my IR photography to the Viv Series One 105mm macro, FA 77 Ltd and a kit lens purchased with a DS. If someone gives me a B&H gift card for Christmas I'll probably buy a filter to fit the 55-300 since I'm having so much fun with it.

I had originally figured I'd buy a 77 mm filter so I could use some of the step-up rings I already have and buy the couple I would need that I don't have. That would allow me to use all of the lenses I own, except the DA 10-17. However, they are over $300 - for that I could get the camera converted. But I'm just not quite ready to do something so drastic (though I saw some pictures posted taken with the 10-17, and they were really impressive).

The K100 works much better than the K-7 for IR - it's filter is weaker. I just wish it had live-view, it would be really useful for this since you have to use a tripod and long shutter speeds. Scott's idea of using a Panny FZ1 is a neat thought - I wonder if the FZ5 would work also?

Scott - I thought about expense vs. use before I finally bought one. Even with some outstanding landscape scenes around, it's still a lot of extra work and I wasn't sure I could get everything to work right, or enjoy it enough to use it very often (I get frustrated easily). I followed the steps others have posted about and found it's not so complicated as I had thought. It's definitely for leisurely walks, not for quick snaps. I'm now happy I got one - even though it means that I'll be taking 3 cameras and at least one lens I would have otherwise left at home on our upcoming vacation...
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2009, 10:05 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,076
Default

Beautiful picture...and different.
lesmore49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2009, 6:50 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
mole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 8,522
Default

Thanks for sharing the results of your experiment. Isn't it amazing how much less haze there is in the IR frequencies! Great photo too!
mole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2009, 7:49 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
nhmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Posts: 5,202
Default

Really cool, Harriet. Some people at our camera club have been shooting IR. Not sure whether with dedicated cameras or using filters. It sure makes things look interesting.

Patty
nhmom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2009, 9:57 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,327
Default

I'm going to be the dissenter here and say that IR really does nothing for me...I am thankful for color and the ability to see things in full spectrum. I guess in the world of art, it is a form of expression...just not for me.

Good composition on your image though...the trees in the foreground and mountains in the background truly convey the sense of the mountains being a 100 miles away!

BTW, is the idea of IR that you can see distances that you would normally be unable to with the naked eye? If so, I understand the appeal a bit more

Last edited by Wingman; Nov 23, 2009 at 3:18 PM.
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:16 AM.