Panasonic G3 for IR

[Sangoma]

For anyone who wants to try IR without spending too much.


I have converted several cameras for IR in the past, mainly Canon, as that is what I was using at the time.

One of the issues with the older Canons is that just doing a simple inexpensive conversion, the focusing is not accurate. You soon get used to focusing then giving a slight tweak, but it has to be remembered each time.

When I changed to M43 at the end of last year, I decided it was time to modify one for IR.

I first did a G3 with a non working LCD as they can be had for £20 or less. Was a great success, so I bought another with a working screen and converted it.

One of the easiest cameras to strip and reassemble I have seen, the whole job can be comfortably done in an hour.

The big advantage is that the autofocus and metering works 100%, and I use the C1 and C2 setting to store two different white balance settings, so it is just a case of turning it on and shooting.

This was just taken out the front door (hadn't tried it since the trees had leaves on)

That was with a 720 filter and no out of camera colour correction.

Using a blue filter and different white balance, foliage takes on a nice golden appearance.

Just fun, not for any other reason

 

[woof woof]

That's all very interesting Steve and a lovely picture as a bonus!

It's not something I'm ever likely to be interested in doing but I enjoyed your post including the picture and I can see how mirrorless might be better suited to this than other types of camera.

Thanks for posting

 

[Sangoma]

Just did a couple of tests before I use it in a couple of weeks.


This is with the IR filter





And this is with the blue filter




No colour changes/correction, as they came out the camera.
Just changed the white balance between two custom settings

 

[woof woof]

They're both very striking but I think I prefer the one without the blue filter.

 

[Sangoma]

They're both very striking but I think I prefer the one without the blue filter.

I agree, I don't keep them like that, just showing how it comes out the camera.
I like the effect more like this, when most colours are near natural but the leaves turn a goldy colour. (this was done very very quickly)

 

[Petrochemist]

I have a GF2 that's been full spectrum converted. Very easy to use, but the lack of an EVF has proved a distinct disadvantage on a few occasions, the G3 should be a better option
I've tried a wide selection of filters with it the blue & green ones have been somewhat variable some like the #47 & U330 work brilliantly one day and a disappointing the next time I try them.
Red filters tend to work well, but need post processing (channel swap or hue adjustment) to get blue skies. Hue adjustment can give a wide variety of results:
sml P1150526ah by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

Bingham rocks by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

Though I rather like the SOOC look I get for many subjects, especially where people are present:
Flatford bridge by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

My GF2 was brought pre-converted for a previous user & cost less than getting an old camera converted. (Not as cheap as converting yourself)

 

[woof woof]

I agree, I don't keep them like that, just showing how it comes out the camera.
I like the effect more like this, when most colours are near natural but the leaves turn a goldy colour. (this was done very very quickly)

It's good to have the option available as I'm sure some scenes will suit it very well.

 

[woof woof]

Lovely pictures there Mike. Well done!

 

[Petrochemist]

Lovely pictures there Mike. Well done!

Thank you, those were all from occasions with strong sunshine. Sunshine is not needed for good IR shots but it certainly helps.
The fact that I'd had years of playing with IR before they were taken probably helped as well.

 

[woof woof]

Thank you, those were all from occasions with strong sunshine. Sunshine is not needed for good IR shots but it certainly helps.
The fact that I'd had years of playing with IR before they were taken probably helped as well.

They all have nice skies, that's often something that's lacking here.

 

[Sangoma]

I have a GF2 that's been full spectrum converted. Very easy to use, but the lack of an EVF has proved a distinct disadvantage on a few occasions, the G3 should be a better option
I've tried a wide selection of filters with it the blue & green ones have been somewhat variable some like the #47 & U330 work brilliantly one day and a disappointing the next time I try them.
Red filters tend to work well, but need post processing (channel swap or hue adjustment) to get blue skies. Hue adjustment can give a wide variety of results:
sml P1150526ah by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

Bingham rocks by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

Though I rather like the SOOC look I get for many subjects, especially where people are present:
Flatford bridge by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

My GF2 was brought pre-converted for a previous user & cost less than getting an old camera converted. (Not as cheap as converting yourself)

Very nice, I like them

I have several pages of samples, what filters, what channel swaps etc. from a Canon, must do it again for the G3.
I use two custom white balances, which are stored in C1 and C2 which means less work later, and does somewhat limit changes by different weather

 

[Petrochemist]

Very nice, I like them

I have several pages of samples, what filters, what channel swaps etc. from a Canon, must do it again for the G3.
I use two custom white balances, which are stored in C1 and C2 which means less work later, and does somewhat limit changes by different weather

Yes I also have 2 saved CWB, but I'm not good at remembering which works best with which filter.
I have found my two full spectrum cameras can produce very different results with the same filters...

 

[who?]

Do you just remove the filter or replace it?

I'm tempted to pick up a cheap body and try some astro-photography.

 

[Petrochemist]

Do you just remove the filter or replace it?

I'm tempted to pick up a cheap body and try some astro-photography.

I've not found a full spectrum conversion much help for astro-photography. The camera may be much more sensitive to Ha but it also picks up twice as much sky glow. Perhaps if I was better at astro I'd be able to select better subjects or would get filters to reduce that skyglow (nebulae filters in large sizes are too expensive for me & I'm too lazy to set up my scope)

 

[Sangoma]

Do you just remove the filter or replace it?

I'm tempted to pick up a cheap body and try some astro-photography.

I replaced it with clear glass.
You can just remove it, as it does not need the glass to focus correctly.

I know nothing about the requirements for astro-photography, I think I last saw the moon the day after the last eclipse before last night, never mind any stars!

Remove the clouds and I might have some enthusiasm

 

[who?]

I've not found a full spectrum conversion much help for astro-photography. The camera may be much more sensitive to Ha but it also picks up twice as much sky glow. Perhaps if I was better at astro I'd be able to select better subjects or would get filters to reduce that skyglow (nebulae filters in large sizes are too expensive for me & I'm too lazy to set up my scope)

My eldest has the attic room with a scope up all the time occupying one of the velux windows.

Agree on the filter costs- but it seems that everything related to telescopes is £££.

Was thinking an mft-T adapter and no eyepiece and see what happens. We're fairly rural so not much light pollution - although that will change due to the amount of building going on. Probably have to look at stack software and motors as well....

 

[Petrochemist]

My eldest has the attic room with a scope up all the time occupying one of the velux windows.

Agree on the filter costs- but it seems that everything related to telescopes is £££.

Was thinking an mft-T adapter and no eyepiece and see what happens. We're fairly rural so not much light pollution - although that will change due to the amount of building going on. Probably have to look at stack software and motors as well....

Several of my scopes won't focus to infinity via a T adapter. If you're shooting MFT a better linkage is via a C-mount adapter (1 1/4" tube to c-mount & c-mount to MFT). These allow the camera to get much closer to the scope & ensure infinity focus.

This arrangement has worked well for prime focus shots (camera directly on the scope) during the day with my 650mm f/5 Newtonian. Adding a barlow for 'negative projection' gave more magnification but a slightly softer image. My efforts using both an eyepiece & a lens (an 'afocal' setup) gave even greater magnification (~3000mm) but where definitely hindered by diffraction

 

[who?]

Several of my scopes won't focus to infinity via a T adapter. If you're shooting MFT a better linkage is via a C-mount adapter (1 1/4" tube to c-mount & c-mount to MFT). These allow the camera to get much closer to the scope & ensure infinity focus.

This arrangement has worked well for prime focus shots (camera directly on the scope) during the day with my 650mm f/5 Newtonian. Adding a barlow for 'negative projection' gave more magnification but a slightly softer image. My efforts using both an eyepiece & a lens (an 'afocal' setup) gave even greater magnification (~3000mm) but where definitely hindered by diffraction

Thanks - I'll look into that.

Eldest has taken some pretty decent pics with just phone and a sort of clamp arrangement. Not sure if thats with eyepieces or not tbh.
It is a newtonian, I think 8" diameter, no idea about focal length.

 

[Petrochemist]

Thanks - I'll look into that.

Eldest has taken some pretty decent pics with just phone and a sort of clamp arrangement. Not sure if thats with eyepieces or not tbh.
It is a newtonian, I think 8" diameter, no idea about focal length.

Afocal (with the eyepiece) is the normal approach with phones (& fixed lens cameras) so it was probably that.
8" is sadly bigger than any of mine, focal length is probably somewhere between my shortest newtonian (300mm) & my longest (1100mm)

To bring this discussion back on topic a bit I'll just mention that mirror systems are completely free of chromatic aberration so can be useful where unusually large wavelength ranges are used (IR & visual light & perhaps UV too). I wouldn't want to try prime focus as the sensor would be exposed & converted cameras can be more sensitive to dust. I have tried a mirror lens shooting 'full spectrum' and didn't see any issues with focus shift...