|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Removing a filter from your sensor?
I saw a post by a photographer on Instagram who said that he paid to have a filter removed from his sensor so that it would capture light not visible to the human eye. He does astrophotography so it is seemingly a benefit to that work. Is this really a thing? I'm not familiar with the design/concept/layers of a DSLR sensor, but I found this intriguing. Seemingly it would have a negative effect upon images taken in daylight. If you have knowledge of this, please share, including what it would benefit, cost, improve, etc. Thank you. Mar 09 24 07:56 pm Link Kolari is a somewhat popular camera conversion service with photographers. They also sell converted cameras. Here is Mathieu Stern's video on a camera converted to "full spectrum," in which he mostly discusses shooting infrared -- not UV. Here is Stern's recent video about shooting UV. Mar 09 24 08:45 pm Link I think the big three DSLR manufacturers all make or made at least one version that came without the filter directly from the factory. The cameras were identified by the letter a after the model number such as the Nikon d810a and the Canon Ra. I'm not 100% sure if Sony had one or not if memory serves me right they were the first ones to do that though. Mar 10 24 04:32 am Link How does "full spectrum" affect normal daylight conditions? Mar 10 24 07:36 am Link Omaroo wrote: Do you mean shooting with a full spectrum camera without a filter? If so, look at this. Mar 10 24 09:32 am Link Omaroo wrote: A filter with the characteristics of the original filter can be placed on the front of the lens. (As well as several other filters with varying characteristics.) Mar 10 24 01:10 pm Link Omaroo wrote: I had the IR cut filter removed from a DSLr so that I can shoot digital infrared. Mar 10 24 06:16 pm Link Mark Salo wrote: Of course, filters can also be placed behind the lens. Mar 10 24 10:28 pm Link Removing a filter from the sensor of some early Sigma digital SLRs will enable you to take pictures through people's clothing, or so it's been claimed, I haven't tried this myself. Mar 11 24 04:28 am Link As said before, Kolari does filter removal, as does Llewelyn (maxmax.com)- use cases seem to be astrophotography and scientific research , apparently, things like vegetation stress is more obvious in the near-infrared range. Astrophotography makes perfect sense as some astral body also might be radiating outside the visible light spectrum. Maxmax.com has a ton of info on the subject…they also do bayer filter removal for those wanting to convert a camera to monochrome. I know that Phase One had specific warnings about removing the UV filter glass on their CCD sensors that were all about potentially altering the focal plane…meaning infinity focus might be impacted because the focal plane is slightly further without the glass…I would THINK that would be negligible but someone bothered to put it in the manual, anyway…I happened on it researching how to address a older back with a damaged filter. They didn’t mention the IR cut filter at all, just the UV filter (which is the top of the stack so the easiest accessible. Sounds like it might be an interesting tool for SFX work, maybe…and something in a CMOS sensor with live view would both reduce the potential focus impact and the unpredictability of capturing light your eyes are not equipped to see. Personally I’d never do it to my *only* camera as I sorta need it to behave “normally” but if I had a spare that I could sacrifice to the gods of weirdness, it might be an interesting thing to try… Mar 11 24 06:07 am Link JSouthworth wrote: This would be a must have for any serious student of human anatomy! LOL Mar 11 24 08:14 am Link Lifepixel (.com) also does IR and UV conversions. They did a IR for me on a Canon 5D, and, other that that the lenses that I have are not ideal for IR, I've been happy. Mar 11 24 03:15 pm Link JSouthworth wrote: It was also claimed that certain handicams had similar functionality. When put to the test it was pretty much nonsense. Essentially if a woman was wearing a tight white shirt and had strongly contrasting skin tones underneath it you might get an outline of their appearance. Maybe. Mar 17 24 01:42 am Link |
