Anybody that has experience with lifepixel... convert nikon or canon?

[pictureEVERYTHING]

Here's the short story. I'm planning on having a camera converted to infrared capture sometime soon. Soon after that I plan on buying more of a pro-level dslr that I hope will last me at least a few years.
So it would be nice if they were from the same system. It's not entirely necessary though because I'm more interested in quality of the images than whether or not I have to buy the same lens twice. Aside from that, my uses for the infrared will probably differ from my uses for the other that I would wind up needing different lenses anyway.

So my question is... has anyone had better luck with Nikon vs Canon in the converted-to-IR sense of things? I plan on getting just the basic conversion so that I can shoot color and b/w IR... but I'll honestly probably be using the b/w the most. I like super contrasty shots versus stuff with alot of gray.
The models I've been mulling over are the XTi or 40D from Canon. Only thing I'm not sure of on the 40 is it's tendancy towards ISO 400. I'm more used to the 100 mark with my tastes in b/w. And for Nikon probably a D80... I want to avoid the D40/x if possible.

Any thoughts from those with experience?

 

[jstuedle]

I have a Nikon D1 I converted with the hepl of L.P. web site. Very easy to do. Used Nikon D1X's can be had for a song and make great IR cameras.

 

[pictureEVERYTHING]

Thanks for the reply... I was looking to get something a little more up to date. Not that the D1 wouldn't be a great camera... Thanks for the help though.

One of the things I was concerned about is that the Lifepixel website seems as though they tend more toward Canon for this conversion. Noting that a few Nikon models do not support custom white balance after the conversion.
Another issue for me is that there is a new type of filter in front of the 40D's sensor... I was wondering how this would affect a conversion to IR.

 

[jstuedle]

I was referring to the X for conversion, it is a very capable camera and has great IR response, since it is CCD. I still shoot a couple of them even now. When my D3 gets here, I am thinking of converting one of mine to IR and retiring the D1. Some CMOS sensors are relatively poor when it comes to IR. A great site for some IR info is:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

Bjorn's site is just spectacular.

 

[XJBaylor]

One of the things I was concerned about is that the Lifepixel website seems as though they tend more toward Canon for this conversion.

I wouldn't say that they tend more towards Canon. One of the most common dslr conversions is the D70. I will be sending in my D100 fairly soon, as I have heard others say that they have good luck with them.

Regardless, I would decide on the visible spectrum camera that you want, and then buy an older camera from the same line to have converted. Don't just read the spec sheets, handle the cameras.

Keith

 

[pictureEVERYTHING]

wow - good replys, thanks guys.

So it's ccd that is better with IR huh? Is that to say that the cmos is VERY inferior, or just a little bit?

 

[jstuedle]

wow - good replys, thanks guys.

So it's ccd that is better with IR huh? Is that to say that the cmos is VERY inferior, or just a little bit?

Actually, CCD's for the most part are inferior to CMOS chips IN GENERAL PHOTOGRAPHY. The CCD can see light we can't in the IR spectrum and needs a filter to reduce this response. Remove this filter and you have a IR and visible spectrum camera. Add the IR filter and you have a great IR only camera. Some CMOS chips see little IR and the conversion works poorly on them. Bjorn's site shows how the D2X has a poorer IR response than the D1X. This is due in part to it's superior visible spectrum response. I hope this is a little clearer than mud, It's late on a long day. Wish you luck.