Re: Infrared Filters for Digital Photography with D70
- From: "Neil Harrington" <not@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 15:59:56 -0400
"bino" <critic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ysadnddcLP1dC-bVnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I've searched the archive, and it looks like the Hoya R72 is the favorite,
and oft recommended in this group. But then I found this thread on APUG:
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/40361-b-w-092-vs-hoya-rm72.html
In there you'll see this list:
"Wratten # 25 (Old designation: A): 600 nm
Wratten # 29 (Old designation: F): 620 nm
B+W 091 (Schott RG630): 630 nm
B+W 092 (Schott RG695): 695 nm
Wratten # 89B: 715 nm
Hoya R72: 720 nm
Wratten # 88A: 745 nm
Wratten # 87: 795 nm
B+W 093 (Schott RG830): 830 nm
Wratten 87C: 850 nm
All Wratten data from Kodak Photographic Filters Handbook, B-3, 1992"
So now I'm thinking, why not get the B+W 093, as it'll cut out even more
of the infrared light?
You seem to be confused, unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. The
purpose of a 720nm cutoff in such a filter is to cut out the *visible*
light, not the infrared. That a 720nm filter does sufficiently well and
there's usually no reason to go farther. The wavelengths of visible light
are in the range of about 400 to 700 nm.
You do understand that such a filter is used for infrared photography, not
visible light photography, don't you?
The only reason I can think of not to, is that the shadows would be even
darker, but for all I know, the effect will be negligible.
Any thoughts?
What is it exactly that you want to do?
Neil
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: I AM IN NEED OF PHOTOGRAPHER HELP
- Next by Date: Re: Infrared Filters for Digital Photography with D70
- Previous by thread: Infrared Filters for Digital Photography with D70
- Next by thread: Re: Infrared Filters for Digital Photography with D70
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
