Anteitam

I generally need to have a longer shutter speed and higher ISO with the IR camera, because even though it's letting in light not normally visible to people (or cameras) it is excluding the visible spectrum. So less light overall. If I was to record ALL light possible it would likely result in blurry/hazy images because of how such varying wavelengths focus so differently. Humans can generally see only a very narrow band of light. It also doesn't help most lenses are made for visible light which means I have to to be picky about which lens to use to avoid "hot spots" in IR. Luckily the 24-120mm is fairly cheap and as far as standard lenses go has minimal issues with IR. If I was to modify a camera for IR again in the future I would likely remove all filters from the sensor to let all possible light in. Then just use lens filters to block specific ranges I didn't want. As it is now, my D800 only allows in light at 830nanometers and higher. For reference humans can only perceive about 400-700 nanometers with only the tiniest bit of variation. There may be an issue with focus on a DSLR, but with mirrorless there is no need to modify the AF settings. Fun fact: Women exclusively are employed as color checkers by clothing manufacturers because a tiny minority of them can perceive extreme subtle differences in reds. Something something 2nd X chromosome making different photoreceptor proteins in the eye. EXIF Nikon D800 (IR >830nm) @ 1/25th & ISO320 Nikon 24-120mm f/4.0 @ 24mm & f/9.0

97Upvotes

More from Carl

seagull doing seagull things

5.71k views ·

Skylar

5.93k views ·

Excuse me, do you have any Grey Poupon?

5.74k views ·

More from Carl

seagull doing seagull things

5.71k views ·

Skylar

5.93k views ·

Excuse me, do you have any Grey Poupon?

5.74k views ·