Infrared using Fujifilm FinePix S2 Pro

[shegeek72]

Hi all, I picked up a Fujifilm Finepix S2 pro on ebay for around $60 that I plan to use for infrared photography. Need recommendations on best lenses for that purpose. Also what filter: 87 or 89B? Thanks!

 

[petrochemist]

My written hand book doesn't show the 89B so I haven't got reference to it's transmission spectra, but the web recons it transmits from 690nm (Kolari class it as a 720nm equivalent).
The 87 starts transmitting about 740nm & reaches 50% around 800nm (50% transmission usually being the wavelength quoted).
If your new camera hasn't been specifically converted to IR (by removal of the hot mirror) I suspect the 89B will include significant longer wavelength visible reds - but this will depend on the actual transmission of the hot mirror. The 87 should only give pure IR so would probably give better results (higher contrast & sharper images, but no chance of drawing out any color - which is possible with 720 filters).

My main IR camera is full spectrum converted seeing IR, visible & (some)UV. I use it with a very wide selection of filters for different effects including many normal photography filters - most of which transmit IR. I occasionally still use unmodified cameras for IR (usually for longer exposures) but with these I never use filters with a cut off below 720nm.

You can get very cheap Chinese IR filters in many wavelengths including 720nm ~ something around 800nm. I've always had acceptable results from these cheap filters. So it may be a good idea to try them before splashing out on more expensive filters especially if your not sure which will be best for you.

I'm afraid I can't offer specific advise on lenses - I don't have any F-mount lenses. The only real problem I've seen in using lenses for IR is hotspots. There are lists of 'lenses that give hotspots' out on the web but I suspect there are too many variables for them to be reliable. I've had hotspots at some apertures using a lens on a normal camera for IR, but never seen them using the same lens for months on the converted camera.

 

[shegeek72]

Thanks for your reply petrochemist! I bought a used Nikon 18mm to 105mm f/3.5-5.6 lens on ebay. It was rated as having a minimal hotspot. What do you think of this adjustable IR filter?

Adjustable Infrared IR Filter Pass X Ray 67mm 530nm to 750nm 720nm 680nm 590nm | eBay

 

[petrochemist]

Thanks for your reply petrochemist! I bought a used Nikon 18mm to 105mm f/3.5-5.6 lens on ebay. It was rated as having a minimal hotspot. What do you think of this adjustable IR filter?

Adjustable Infrared IR Filter Pass X Ray 67mm 530nm to 750nm 720nm 680nm 590nm | eBay

It looks very like the one I got, basically a red filter with a variable ND filter. It works OK on my converted body. It isn't quite as good as a dedicated filter, but is ideal for trying both pure IR & high colour IR to get a feel for what you like.

Effectively it has three zones:
Everything below 500nm is blocked.
From 500-750nm light is partially blocked from around 50% to ~95% depending on the position (the entire block basically changes as one)
Above 750nm most of the light (NIR) is transmitted the control setting has no effect in this zone.

I did a quick video to show its effect when I first played with mine (not very well done I'm afraid just handheld). Playing with CWB will of course change the appearance considerably.
A similar approach is to use a normal variable density filter (Video). At it's darkest it's close to a 720nm filter & you can vary how much of the visible gets added in (though never more than ~50%).

 

[shegeek72]

What filters do recommend for B&W and color IR photography?

 

[petrochemist]

I'd hesitate to recommend specific types as, the subject, the camera, lighting and even the lenses can make a significant difference to the results. The most common choices are probably 720nm (R72 etc) & 590nm (#25A) .

Monochrome images are usually done with 720nm or longer filters - longer wavelengths tend to give more contrast but longer exposures. Some of my newer lenses have a dramatic cut off around 1000nm while most have no sign of a high wavelength drop.
720nm filters do also allow subtle color differences to be pulled out, but red or orange filters allow a lot more color.

There have been times when I've got lovely results from blue & green filters but on other occasions the results from these have been awful! I think it may be down to the amount of IR in the lighting though the post processing done also makes a dramatic difference. These are not traditional IR filter choices, but having the camera already it's not been an expensive job to experiment. I'd like to try a Baader U2 (which passes UV but not visible or IR) but they are too expensive for me. The U330 (practically only UV & IR) has also given some excellent results.

Over the years I've measure spectral transmission of quite a number of filters & crudely tabulated it. These are available (along with a few where I pulled data from the web) on one of the infrared specific photo forums - here

 

[shegeek72]

Thanks, again! Do you shoot raw or jpg for IR photography?

 

[petrochemist]

I usually shoot both, but I've yet to gain any real benefit from the RAW files my post processing skills aren't as good as my cameras!