Fuji X-T1 IR (actually UV-VIS-IR)

[Solarflare]

Fuji announces the X-T1 IR for infrared photography Fuji Rumors

Fuji US just announced the “X-T1 IR” which is an infrared version of the classic X-T1. theVerge & Dpreview. write: “The camera captures light from UV, visible and infrared portions of the spectrum, from approximately 380-1000nm. While Fujifilm cites crime scene investigation and healthcare as applications, there are plenty of ‘regular photographers’ who will find the X-T1 IR intriguing as well.”
The new X-T1 IR costs $1699 and will ship from October.

Whow ! Thats great ! You can buy this camera directly from the producer, instead of having to find somebody to make the conversion !

The main problem would be of course - which Fuji X lenses are actually useable with this camera ?

 

[Solarflare]

Thom Hogan agrees with my initial question:

What I don’t quite understand in the Fujifilm press release is “pairs seamlessly with each high quality Fujinon XF lens.” I find it unlikely that the existing XF lenses are very good at transmitting UV light. Generally, glass and the coatings used on glass for photographic purposes, tends to be a UV filter. Likewise, internal lens design is a potential issue at near and deeper IR values, as you get ghosting. It’s unclear to me whether Fujifilm is just saying “works with all existing Fujinon lenses” or they’re suddenly implying that the Fujinon lenses were designed for UV and near-IR work from the get go. Somehow I doubt that. It’ll take some testing to figure out what works best and what doesn’t work.

Exactly what I was thinking ... well not in this detail, but I was wondering which lenses would work.

Maybe all the WR lenses work ? When they introduced WR, they might have known they'll release a broadband camera at that point. And it would make sense - with the X-T1, you really only want WR lenses, right ? Since otherwise the WR of the X-T1 is useless. That would then *checks the internet* be 5 lenses right now:

FUJINON XF 16mm F1.4 R WR
FUJINON XF 90mm F2 R LM WR
FUJINON XF16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR
FUJINON XF50-140mm F2.8 R LM OIS WR
FUJINON XF18-135mm F3.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR

This REALLY needs a macro lens of sorts, though. For forensics, obviously a macro is needed.

 

[f2bthere]

I think you need to rely upon real world experience.

Lens design is a complex art with many trade-offs. It is possible to redesign a lens to work with IR (Zeiss has done so), but IR is a fairly niche product and it wouldn't make sense to prioritize IR capability, even for Fuji.

In general, longer lenses tend to fare better than wide lenses.

Here is one place you can get user reports on various Fuji lenses with IR.

X Photography: Fuji Infrared Lens Tests

Be aware that what range of the IR spectrum you are exposing may effect the lenses performance.

You may note that the Zeiss Macro for Fuji does well up to f5.6 and is still usable at f8.

 

[Solarflare]

Sources on UV and IR :

X Photography: Fuji Infrared Lens Tests
Lens Hotspot List - Kolari Vision
Fuji and Nikon Lenses Vis-UV-IR test

Status:

Rokinon 8mm f/2.8 UMC Fisheye
UV: ?
IR: ? Positive Reports, but unclear if version I or II

Rokinon 8mm f/2.8 UMC Fisheye II
UV ?
IR: ? Positive Reports, but unclear if version I or II

Carl Zeiss Touit Distagon T* 12mm f2.8
UV: ?
IR: ?

XF 14mm f2.8 R
UV: ?
IR: OK. Some sources say mild hotspot above f8.0.

XF 16mm f1.4 R WR
UV: ?
IR: ?

XF 18mm f2.0 R
UV: ?
IR: No. Very soft wide open, quickly develops hotspots.

XF 23mm f1.4 R
UV: ?
IR: OK

XF 27mm f2.8
UV: Good transmittance, strong backfocus.
IR: No. Wide open only.

Carl Zeiss Touit Planar T* 32mm f1.8
UV: ?
IR: ?

XF 35mm f1.4 R
UV: ?
IR: Useable up to f8.0, some say f11.0.

XF 35mm f2.0 R WR
UV: ?
IR: ?

Carl Zeiss Touit Makro-Planar T* 50mm f2.8
UV: ?
IR: Useable up to f5.6.

XF 56mm f1.2 R [APD]
UV: ?
IR: No. Only useable at f2.8. Soft below and hotspots above. APD version identical (unsurprisingly, optical formula is exactly the same).

XF 60mm f2.4 R Macro
UV: ?
IR: No. Only useable up to f2.8.

XF 90mm f2.0 R LM WR
UV: ?
IR: ?





XF 10-24mm f4.0 R OIS
UV: ?
IR: No. Only hotspot-free at 24mm wide open.

XF 16-55mm f2.8 R LM WR
UV: ?
IR: ?

XC 16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OIS
UV: ? -- reports of bad transmission and slight frontfocus do not specify version
IR: ? -- mixed reports

XC 16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OIS II
UV: ? -- reports of bad transmission and slight frontfocus do not specify version
IR: ? -- maybe thats why theres mixed reports, there are two versions

XF 18-55mm f2.8-4.0 R LM OIS
UV: ?
IR: No. Only useable at 35mm and above wide open.

XF 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 LM OIS WR
UV: ?
IR: OK. Only a slight hotspot at 135mm and f/22.

XF 50-140mm f2.8 R LM OIS WR
UV: ?
IR: ?

XC 50-230mm f4.5-6.7 OIS
UV: Very little transmission, backfocus.
IR: OK up to f/8 (nothing else tested), backfocus.

XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 R LM OIS
UV: ?
IR: Useable up to f/8.



So thats for IR:

Great (no issues): XF 23mm f1.4 R, possibly Rokinon 8mm f/2.8 UMC Fisheye (but 2 versions exist)

Good (only minor issues): XF 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 LM OIS WR

Tolerable (useable up to f/8): XF 14mm f2.8 R, XF 35mm f1.4 R, XC 50-230mm f4.5-6.7 OIS, XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

Barely tolerable (useable up to f/5.6): Carl Zeiss Touit Makro-Planar T* 50mm f2.8

Intolerable (only useable in sweet spot): XF 27mm f2.8, XF 56mm f1.2 R [APD], XF 60mm f2.4 R Macro

Unusable: XF 18mm f2.0 R, XF 10-24mm f4.0 R OIS,

Unknown: Carl Zeiss Touit Distagon T* 12mm f2.8, XF 16mm f1.4 R WR, Carl Zeiss Touit Planar T* 32mm f1.8, XF 35mm f2.0 R WR, XF 90mm f2.0 R LM WR, XF 16-55mm f2.8 R LM WR, XF 50-140mm f2.8 R LM OIS WR

Mixed Reports: XC 16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OIS, XC 16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OIS II

 

[Solarflare]

WTF ?!??!!?!?!?!?????

Apparently in the USA, the Fuji X-T1 IR is only sold to the military and to law-enforcement agencies .... ?!?

XF100-400 available in Europe at AmazonDE :: First Fuji X-T1 IR shooter in Europe – Fuji Rumors

I'm truely baffled.

Then again civilian demand is probably not very high, anyway.

 

[growl]

For those of you interested, I did a quick review of the Fuji XF 35mm F2 on a Fuji X-T10 Full Spectrum Camera with the Hoya r72 and the B+W 403UV filter to check for any hotspots. Basically no signs of hotspots from what I could see. I haven't tested a 830nm filter yet (because I don't have one at the moment).

XF 35mm F2
IR: 720nm = ok
UV: B+W 403UV filter = ok

Check out my blog post here:
Fuji XF 35mm F2 IR & UV hotspot test

 

[Gary A.]

I am thinking of converting my X100S into IR or UV. Anybody know if this is a good idea or not?

 

[growl]

I am thinking of converting my X100S into IR or UV. Anybody know if this is a good idea or not?

If you are wanting to do proper UV then the x100s might not be ideal. But if you want to use the B+W 403 UV filter then it might be ok (you would need to do a Full Spectrum conversion). I haven't read a lot about full spectrum X100/s/t cameras, just Infrared conversions.

On a non converted X100/s/t, the lens suffers from hotspots (more pronounced with deep infrared filters with numbers over 800nm).

There was one person who got his X100s converted by Kolari Vision with their new AR coated filters (to help reduce/eliminate hotspots) to 830nm I think, I can't remember the link offhand.

I was trying to decide to convert my x100s or x-t10 to full spectrum, and ended up choosing the x-t10 due to more flexibility with lenses (some lenses are good for IR and some are good for UV, however UV filters are expensive and UV lenses are as well).

The X100s can take some decent IR photos as is, by using a Hoya r72 filter, even hand held. But no where near as good as a fully converted camera.

 

[Gary A.]

I am thinking of converting my X100S into IR or UV. Anybody know if this is a good idea or not?

If you are wanting to do proper UV then the x100s might not be ideal. But if you want to use the B+W 403 UV filter then it might be ok (you would need to do a Full Spectrum conversion). I haven't read a lot about full spectrum X100/s/t cameras, just Infrared conversions.

On a non converted X100/s/t, the lens suffers from hotspots (more pronounced with deep infrared filters with numbers over 800nm).

There was one person who got his X100s converted by Kolari Vision with their new AR coated filters (to help reduce/eliminate hotspots) to 830nm I think, I can't remember the link offhand.

I was trying to decide to convert my x100s or x-t10 to full spectrum, and ended up choosing the x-t10 due to more flexibility with lenses (some lenses are good for IR and some are good for UV, however UV filters are expensive and UV lenses are as well).

The X100s can take some decent IR photos as is, by using a Hoya r72 filter, even hand held. But no where near as good as a fully converted camera.

Thank you, most informative ... and you just joined today. Welcome to the forum. I will contact Kolari Vision and again thank you.

 

[growl]

I am thinking of converting my X100S into IR or UV. Anybody know if this is a good idea or not?

If you are wanting to do proper UV then the x100s might not be ideal. But if you want to use the B+W 403 UV filter then it might be ok (you would need to do a Full Spectrum conversion). I haven't read a lot about full spectrum X100/s/t cameras, just Infrared conversions.

On a non converted X100/s/t, the lens suffers from hotspots (more pronounced with deep infrared filters with numbers over 800nm).

There was one person who got his X100s converted by Kolari Vision with their new AR coated filters (to help reduce/eliminate hotspots) to 830nm I think, I can't remember the link offhand.

I was trying to decide to convert my x100s or x-t10 to full spectrum, and ended up choosing the x-t10 due to more flexibility with lenses (some lenses are good for IR and some are good for UV, however UV filters are expensive and UV lenses are as well).

The X100s can take some decent IR photos as is, by using a Hoya r72 filter, even hand held. But no where near as good as a fully converted camera.

Thank you, most informative ... and you just joined today. Welcome to the forum. I will contact Kolari Vision and again thank you.

Let me know how it goes, I'm very interested how the X100s fares with AR coated full spectrum glass. It will give you lots of opportunities to try out different filters and see which one you like the most!

For me, so far, my favourite is the B+W 403 UV filter, it gives a nice coloured infrared look straight out of camera without any post processing. And you can always set to B+W for more traditional IR look as well.

 

[Solarflare]

All X100 models to date (X100, X100s, X100t, X100f) use identical optics, which apparently develops hotspots with IR at all apertures.

I dont remember where I read that though and I dont remember reading anything about the X70.

I would strongly suggest to use system cameras for full conversions.

 

[growl]

I did another hotspot test. This time for the Fuji XF 50mm F2 - No visible hotspots from what I could see.

Blog post url below along with photos and list of filters used
Fuji XF 50mm F2 IR & UV Hotspot Test

 

[jcdeboever]

I am thinking of converting my X100S into IR or UV. Anybody know if this is a good idea or not?

Bad idea, send it to me instead.

 

[growl]

I am thinking of converting my X100S into IR or UV. Anybody know if this is a good idea or not?

If you are wanting to do proper UV then the x100s might not be ideal. But if you want to use the B+W 403 UV filter then it might be ok (you would need to do a Full Spectrum conversion). I haven't read a lot about full spectrum X100/s/t cameras, just Infrared conversions.

On a non converted X100/s/t, the lens suffers from hotspots (more pronounced with deep infrared filters with numbers over 800nm).

There was one person who got his X100s converted by Kolari Vision with their new AR coated filters (to help reduce/eliminate hotspots) to 830nm I think, I can't remember the link offhand.

I was trying to decide to convert my x100s or x-t10 to full spectrum, and ended up choosing the x-t10 due to more flexibility with lenses (some lenses are good for IR and some are good for UV, however UV filters are expensive and UV lenses are as well).

The X100s can take some decent IR photos as is, by using a Hoya r72 filter, even hand held. But no where near as good as a fully converted camera.

Thank you, most informative ... and you just joined today. Welcome to the forum. I will contact Kolari Vision and again thank you.

Hi! Wondering if you got your X100S converted and if so who did you choose and what filter did you get.
I recently got an X100F and will be converting it later and was hoping to find more people with converted cameras.

 

[growl]

Another lens tested

Fuji XF 18mm F2
Fuji XF 18mm F2 IR & UV Hotspot Test

Not a good lens, especially at 930nm (all apertures have hot spots), I didn't my 720nm filter as I forgot it, but i did test a filter that lets in IR (around 830nm i think) and that had hotspots showing from F8 to F16. So II'm assuming a lower IR filter (like 500-600nm) would be ok.