Infrared Conversion in NSW

[piczzilla]

Trying to repurpose my dusty D90 - Does anyone know where to get IR conversion done in NSW?

[Cage]

I have this mob on my eBay watch-list. http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Nikon-D80...-/122291752631

I don't know anything about them but as you are handy you could call in and check them out.

I intend to get a D600/D610 modded for astro use but I'll probably send it to LifePixel in the states.

[piczzilla]

I have this mob on my eBay watch-list. http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Nikon-D80...-/122291752631

I don't know anything about them but as you are handy you could call in and check them out.

I intend to get a D600/D610 modded for astro use but I'll probably send it to LifePixel in the states.

Thanks heaps for this! Am browsing their website as we speak. I never knew there's such a thing as a full spectrum camera (all in one - sounds very handy when I read the description), so I'm looking that direction now.

But it's a bit on the expensive side (and possibly not really worth it for D90), I'm starting to think about getting a second full-frame body for this conversion....

[ameerat42]

"Full spectrum"* refers to the ability of sensors to capture both UV and IR as well as visible
light with the "hot mirror" removed. You then employ various IR or UV block/pass filters to work
in the "spectrum" you want.

*But it's rather like saying "astro/cosmo"naut for those who have been in orbit or to the moon.

[arthurking83]

Camera Clinic does this type of conversion, which saves you the $s in sending it overseas.

But in saying that, their conversions are expensive themselves.

Get an appropriate screwdriver set, a can of air and get the clear cover glass from lifepixel .... and DIY.

If you're like me tho, and don't have the patience to carefully peel back the rubber grippy materials on the camera body, get a rubber grip set as well.

I'm planning on doing my D300 one of these days, but the D70s repair has to be done first .... before I destroy the D300!

[piczzilla]

"Full spectrum"* refers to the ability of sensors to capture both UV and IR as well as visible
light with the "hot mirror" removed. You then employ various IR or UV block/pass filters to work
in the "spectrum" you want.

*But it's rather like saying "astro/cosmo"naut for those who have been in orbit or to the moon.

275 AUD for the conversion and 670 USD (870 AUD?) for various filters (82mm) *faint*


I need to start prioritizing....

- - - Updated - - -

Camera Clinic does this type of conversion, which saves you the $s in sending it overseas.

But in saying that, their conversions are expensive themselves.

Get an appropriate screwdriver set, a can of air and get the clear cover glass from lifepixel .... and DIY.

If you're like me tho, and don't have the patience to carefully peel back the rubber grippy materials on the camera body, get a rubber grip set as well.

I'm planning on doing my D300 one of these days, but the D70s repair has to be done first .... before I destroy the D300!

The only DIY I've ever done was changing my D90 focusing screen to split prism (KatzEye). I thought I was gonna die of heart attack before I finished changing it. LOL

[ameerat42]

Yep, perhaps a re-think with that sorta DOH!
"Piddy" you don't have what I've got: the Σ SD1M. The ΣSD series from the SD15 to the
latest SD Quattros let you just flip the "hot mirror" out for instant "full spectrum", and then
clip it back later. It's only if you drp or crack it. Cuppla 100 replacement.

- - - Updated - - -

Having said all that, I've "nevva bovvered" to try FS with the gear. I sort of did a bit
in the 70s and 80s with the various Kodak IR films... Never really went in for it the effect
afterwards

[arthurking83]

Note that if you do a full spectrum conversion(that's my plan) .. think of it as a 'gonner'!
If you have no other use for that camera, then selling it to increase your bank balance is not going to nett you all that much .. maybe $50-$100(if someone is silly enough to pay $100 for a D90!)

I reckon a D300 is probably worth maybe $100-200 tops. Maybe there are people out there willing to pay more! .. if so(and you know of any, get me their contact details! )

So, that being the case, that a D90 is not worth the effort to sell .. then spend a bit of money on the cover glass and use it for full spectrum imaging.
Forget trying to get 'UV cut' filters. Maybe get an 'IR cut' filter to minimise IR capture and get into UV imaging.(that's my plan)

While there are lots of screws to pull a camera apart, I don't think it's one of those mission impossible type operations.
The hard part is keeping track of all the screws(have a system to do that) and make sure if any cable ribbons need to be removed, they're done so with caution(ie. not pulled too hard).

Remember, the camera itself isn't worth a lot of $s, so if you monumentally stuff it up, you've really lost not much .. and it's a good excuse to bin it .. 'recycle it'.

I have to replace the mirror box in the D70s, which a much harder operation ... much more mechanically complex than to remove the sensor filter stack and replace it .. and then screw all those camera body bits together again.
You don't disturb any overly sensitive mechanical parts in removing the sensor array.
The only trick to watch for is simply dust! You just don't want any dust between the new cover glass and the sensor, nor to touch the exposed, filterless sensor material.

Katzeye is a good primer to get into the guts of the camera too.
Do it again. remove the katzeye, give it a can-o-air inside the prism housing to de dust it a bit, and put it together again.
Doing the focus screen is actually quite hard. Hard in the sense that one little slip up and the focus screen can easily be a piece of plastic rubbish!

[Cage]

Are you intending to do infrared photography, or night photography like the Milky Way and Nebula.

From LifePixel the D90 with the H-Alpha conversion for Milky Way and Nebula is $US275.00 + postage https://www.lifepixel.com/shop/our-s...era-conversion and the same price for the Infrared conversion including your choice of filter. https://www.lifepixel.com/shop/our-s...red-conversion

The $US650.00 filter is an UV Bandpass Filter for ultra violet photography.

I did a Google check on Camera Clinic and as AK mentioned they are very pricey and they also have some very ordinary feedback.

PS: And good on Uncle Arthur for going the DIY route. Not for me though, as I want perfect results from my shots, and don't trust my inexperience to allow me to do the job properly. Also I don't have an old, no longer used camera to try it on. I'll be buying the D600/D610 for my H-Alpha mod and it will be my main astro camera.

[piczzilla]

Note that if you do a full spectrum conversion(that's my plan) .. think of it as a 'gonner'!
If you have no other use for that camera, then selling it to increase your bank balance is not going to nett you all that much .. maybe $50-$100(if someone is silly enough to pay $100 for a D90!)

I reckon a D300 is probably worth maybe $100-200 tops. Maybe there are people out there willing to pay more! .. if so(and you know of any, get me their contact details! )

So, that being the case, that a D90 is not worth the effort to sell .. then spend a bit of money on the cover glass and use it for full spectrum imaging.
Forget trying to get 'UV cut' filters. Maybe get an 'IR cut' filter to minimise IR capture and get into UV imaging.(that's my plan)

While there are lots of screws to pull a camera apart, I don't think it's one of those mission impossible type operations.
The hard part is keeping track of all the screws(have a system to do that) and make sure if any cable ribbons need to be removed, they're done so with caution(ie. not pulled too hard).

Remember, the camera itself isn't worth a lot of $s, so if you monumentally stuff it up, you've really lost not much .. and it's a good excuse to bin it .. 'recycle it'.

I have to replace the mirror box in the D70s, which a much harder operation ... much more mechanically complex than to remove the sensor filter stack and replace it .. and then screw all those camera body bits together again.
You don't disturb any overly sensitive mechanical parts in removing the sensor array.
The only trick to watch for is simply dust! You just don't want any dust between the new cover glass and the sensor, nor to touch the exposed, filterless sensor material.

Katzeye is a good primer to get into the guts of the camera too.
Do it again. remove the katzeye, give it a can-o-air inside the prism housing to de dust it a bit, and put it together again.
Doing the focus screen is actually quite hard. Hard in the sense that one little slip up and the focus screen can easily be a piece of plastic rubbish!

While I appreciate all these DIY tips, I have to admit I was trembling at the imagination. I think it would do more damage to my health than the camera's LOL. And I agree regarding dust. That was my No. 1 concern too when installing KatzEye. Think I'll stick with assembling PCs and leave cameras to the professionals

- - - Updated - - -

Are you intending to do infrared photography, or night photography like the Milky Way and Nebula.

From LifePixel the D90 with the H-Alpha conversion for Milky Way and Nebula is $US275.00 + postage https://www.lifepixel.com/shop/our-s...era-conversion and the same price for the Infrared conversion including your choice of filter. https://www.lifepixel.com/shop/our-s...red-conversion

The $US650.00 filter is an UV Bandpass Filter for ultra violet photography.

I did a Google check on Camera Clinic and as AK mentioned they are very pricey and they also have some very ordinary feedback.

PS: And good on Uncle Arthur for going the DIY route. Not for me though, as I want perfect results from my shots, and don't trust my inexperience to allow me to do the job properly. Also I don't have an old, no longer used camera to try it on. I'll be buying the D600/D610 for my H-Alpha mod and it will be my main astro camera.

Well initially I wanted the Full Spectrum to do both. That was until I found out about the price Not really worth it for a D90 imho (and I already spent too much on photography this year....). So now I'm starting to consider IR-only conversion. Still torn between JJCamera & Camera Clinic.

[arthurking83]

While I appreciate all these DIY tips, I have to admit I was trembling at the imagination. I think it would do more damage to my health than the camera's LOL. And I agree regarding dust. That was my No. 1 concern too when installing KatzEye. Think I'll stick with assembling PCs and leave cameras to the professionals

.....

@ $275 I'd stick with JJCamera(if I were in your position .. literally).

That price sounds fairly reasonable, considering the number of hours involved in stripping the camera, then putting it all back together again(in working order).

I may even use them to get my filters, as they're local.
Thought about getting one .... or them, as I'd like one IR only(D70s) and one full spectrum(D300)

My major concern isn't about ruining a camera(as such) .. although I'd obviously prefer not too.
My main concern about the process is the (straight) IR option. So it goes that if you choose one, then you're stuck with that filter, (or wavelength) option.

With the full spectrum option, while it may cost more with the requirement to use specific filters, and of course hoping those filters fit various lenses too! .. but then the option of (say) capturing at 600nm IR for one shot, change the filter(on lens) to another one for deeper 800 or 900nm IR. ie. it gives more options to capture with various creative styles.

Note that fullspectrum, with the option to shoot UV images(ie. block visible and IR) shouldn't cost >$600. While they may be available, you don't need that level of insanity!
I know you can get very decent, quality UV pass filters in the $300 range.
IR filters can be a lot cheaper than that and depending on what you want in terms of IR rendering.
Note that UV is a hard task to get into too tho. The main issue is that irrespective of whatever camera setup, or filter type you choose, modern lenses are a barrier to UV capture. Glass naturally tends to block UV transmission, so all modern lenses limit how deep you can capture in the UV range anyhow. You have to look into getting very old type lenses, manual focus lenses that probably don't fit on the camera, or projection lenses(enlarger lenses) that allow capture in the real UV range.
That is, don't just assume that you want to capture UV images, so you convert camera to full spectrum, get yourself a UVR Optics 52mm filter for a bog standard 50mm f/1.8 lens and off you go! You'd probably spend a good few minutes trying to capture a single exposure, it'll get contaminated with some visible light and more so IR light, so won't be a good UV capture anyhow and you've spent all that money to capture UV with little to no result!
Also note tho that these lenses don't have to cost much either(remembering that they're old! .. which usually means unwanted by many/most).
You can get some decent M42(mount) oldies with no coatings .. think Vivitars and all those old cheapies from wayyy back.(the coatings on the lens are what kills UV transmission).
I have 3 Nikon enlarger lenses that cost me less than $100 all up!, I got two Polish enlarger lenses that cost me $9 .. and a few other (I think three, can't remember) weird lenses too which should work in UV ... roughly $20-ish a pop.

If you're still interested in UV capture, filters to think of getting into are from UVR Optics. (52mm filter for about US$249 .. which works out to about AU$300)

ie. a total cost for half decent full spectrum camera with multi ability would set you back about:

$275(camera conversion)
$300 UV filter
$50(max) for one decent old lens to capture UV .. more like about $20 or so
Super quality tripod setup(for UV capture as exposures are long!)
various flashes torches and other light sources that emit UV. ALl flashes have UV cut designs, but some older Vivitar flashes can be cheaply modded to output UV .. etc, etc ...


ps. I used to have a R720 Hoya, and it was a nice filter to play with. Used it primarily with the Sigma 10-20mm, very few times with the Nikon 18-35mm(as this oldie had an IR focus adjustment indicator) and then the Nikon 80-200/2.8 AF-D(which also had a the IR adjustment dot for focus shift).
One thing that was eye opening was the amount of detail that IR cuts through too for far distant scenes. As long as focus is not 'off' which is easily done in IR if the focus isn't adjusted(it's a design in the lens' optical system) the amount of detail that IR can see through when there ii atmospheric haze is incredible!
Some lenses(rarely) don't need to be adjusted for IR shift, other do a bit, others need a bit more. You can roughly compensate with a focus adjustment in camera, but if each lens focuses IR differently then that adjustment it not so worthwhile.

Many older (design!) lenses usually have the focus shift IR dot.
pps. what that means(in Nikon terms) is that the lens could be a new lens such as the 80-200/2.8 ED AF-D lens or the 50/1.2 Ais lens. Old designs, but still possible to get them new!
They have IR dots in the focus positioning system. The 50 obviously works at 50mm, as it's a prime lens, but the IR mark only works at the 80mm focal length on the 80-200 lens.
Most newer lens designs have dropped the IR focus mark dot, and most barely have any focus mark aides at all.

To get around the IR focus shift issue, most folks shoot at smaller apertures(greater DOF).

Hopefully just some things there to think about.

[piczzilla]

@ $275 I'd stick with JJCamera(if I were in your position .. literally).

I jumped the gun and ordered the 590 nm conversion with JJ camera on Friday waiting for the delivery instructions as we speak.

From my research (and zero experience + limited knowledge, so do take it with a grain of salt), we can achieve deeper look with lighter spectrum during PP, but not the opposite. E.g. if you shoot with 590 nm spectrum, then the sky won't be as dark, and the foliage won't be as light, however since they will be in completely different colour channels, you can easily manipulate it to achieve a photo that's taken with... say.. 720 nm spectrum. However, if you shoot at... say 720 nm spectrum, then there's no way to bring back the foliage colour. Which is why I decided to go with 590 nm. What I'm curious about is the infamous IR hotspot, I'm not sure if it will be better/worse/same with lighter/deeper IR spectrum. I'll just have to hold by breath and see....

I haven't completely given up the idea of an all-spectrum camera yet, am reserving it for a better body than a D90, sometime (hopefully not near) in the future.

Also, I have to say... while reading your comment has been most enlightening, it's given me some crazy ideas too I have N-E-V-E-R heard of UV photography before. I've seen some macro photographers take UV photos with the traditional way (UV flashlight + normal camera), but I have never heard about getting the effect in camera. Not sure if I want to go into it - I can't think of any objects I want to shoot with it, except scorpions perhaps. I'll come seek your guidance again when I change my mind.

Thanks heaps for the advice.

[arthurking83]

UV photography is eye opening.
I love it(in that I'm hoping to get off my @$$ one day and do the necessary mods).
While it costs a heap to the hip pocket, ordering cheap gear off ebay where they reveal themselves is easy.
All those screws and connectors in the camera are 'hard yakka' by comparison!

With the lower spectrum IR filters(ie. your 590nm) you will get more colour coming through as it doesn't block as much of the visible range.
Look at the graphs relating to the wavengths it allows through and it's literally a graph(inverse parabola). This means that it allows some visible light through .. ie. colour!
But the amount is severely attenuated by comparison to the 590nm wavelength(where it peaks).

The 720 still allows some visible colour through too, but once you get into the high 800-900s then it's all black and white.
Any colour in images is truly manufactured via your image editing software.

Note that with IR, your images will be 'all red'. That is they will have a monumental red cast all over. This is normal, and is simply the colour of the filter.
You need to set a whitebalance in the camera. As the camera is going to be IR converted, this will be the whitebalance you use 'all the time'.
D90 has the ability to store about 4 or 5 different WB preset values. I'd suggest that you use them for various conditions you shoot in.

Also note that IR is a wavelength of light(obviously) and that the filter is tuned to capture that wavelength more than others(ie, say 500nm which is the base green wavelength that we predominantly see).
Household lighting barely produces any IR, and as the visible wavelengths are attenuated by the IR filter, your inside shots will be harder to capture.
By how much is going to be trial and error, but your meter will be wrong .. whatever it tells 'ya!
And with the filter over the sensor, trying to estimate exposure via liveview will be 'interesting'. Unless you run SCG style lighting indoors, I doubt you will register any image using liveview(but I don't know).
Maybe if ISO was set to ISO25K or more

ps. some points to think about if you want to use a 'better camera' for the future. Better camera may not be what you think it is(going to be).
Famous example of this was the D700(and I think D600 later), but it had this issue under IR imagery where a hotspot was discovered that couldn't be explained by those that got it. And almost everyone got it.
Hotspots are usually due to the lens design. Some lenses do it more than others, but on the D700 it had hotspots where non hotspotting lenses were used.
Turned out that the hotspot was a result of an IR trigger mounted in the front face of the shutter mechanism. Nikon decided to use an IR device in this location to measure and confirm shutter speed accuracy(and probably count).
Normally the camera is immune to IR capture so for non IR converted D700s .. no problem. But convert the D700 to capture IR, and that IR beam at the front of the shutter is obviously going to be a problem.

I think the D600 also had the issue, but I lost touch with it all since the D610 came into existence.

ps. D90 is a great camera for full spectrum too. Maybe there are other better, or really top notch cameras that can capture invisible spectrum too. D700 had promise to the sensor(but the IR shutter issue killed that).

I think that after all this time has passed, that the D70s sensor is still one of the best to capture IR just due to the sensors sensitivity to IR.
With UV though(as in pure UV, below the 390nm range) not many sensors are sensitive. exposure ranges are in the 5-10 Ev below visible range.
So your 1/100s at f8 visible capture will be more like 1/3s to 10s !!

IR is the opposite I think(haven't done it for a while tho)
I think that with an inbuilt filter(as opposed to a lens filter on a non converted camera) the exposures are either unchanged, or maybe even a bit brighter, so -Ev may need to be used to capture non overexposed images.
I remember this is the case for the D70s sensor(note that sensor was also used in the D100, D50 and D40 cameras too).
Using an IR filter on a non converted camera is a fight between two opposing and similar hardware.
An unconverted camera attenuates the IR band with the hot mirror, so using an IR filter like an R720 is pushing 720nm only while the hot mirror tries hard to block it. Therefore IR capture is harder. Longer exposures needed.
Remove the hot mirror tho and IR floods it way to the sensor with more urgency than does visible light. This is why the hot mirror is added!
IR is more powerful(energetic) and is captured more easily. ie. your exposures should be shorter for a given scene.

[piczzilla]

Note that with IR, your images will be 'all red'. That is they will have a monumental red cast all over. This is normal, and is simply the colour of the filter.
You need to set a whitebalance in the camera. As the camera is going to be IR converted, this will be the whitebalance you use 'all the time'.
D90 has the ability to store about 4 or 5 different WB preset values. I'd suggest that you use them for various conditions you shoot in.

Noted! Just got myself some grey cards off eBay. I was so close to selling my D90 before coming across the suggestion to turn it into IR, so glad I procrastinated lol. Can't believe this ragged old thing can open so many doors.

[ameerat42]

... Can't believe this ragged old thing can open so many doors.

(Betcher yer didn't know it could break through a window if you hurled it - No, )

[piczzilla]

(Betcher yer didn't know it could break through a window if you hurled it - No, )

Not in my agenda at the moment Am, but like Justin Bieber say, never say never

[piczzilla]

@ $275 I'd stick with JJCamera(if I were in your position .. literally).

That price sounds fairly reasonable, considering the number of hours involved in stripping the camera, then putting it all back together again(in working order).

I may even use them to get my filters, as they're local.

Just a bit of an update, I'm sad to say I cannot recommend this company. The conversion service itself is OK, but their turnaround time is T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E. It took them almost 2 months to convert my D90 (website says 2-5 days ), that is with weekly reminders & they finally got to it when I started asking for a refund (2 weeks after I asked for a refund to be more precise). Maybe try Camera Clinic?

[ameerat42]

Did they give you a "reason" why?

[piczzilla]

Did they give you a "reason" why?

Actually, they did after weeks of silent treatment. They said they're moving offices then took 1 more month before I started introducing the dreaded word "refund" into the conversation. But mmmmm.... I dunno, I don't really buy it.... My workplace has moved offices before, and we never took more than 1 week to go back to BAU.

[arthurking83]

Moral of the story: introduce the concept of 'refund' at about the 1-2day timeframe! .. may help to speed up the process.