Infoseite // B & W combined UV-IR filter is recommended?

Frage von LarsProgressiv:


Hello experts,

someone knows this filter:

B & W 486 UV-IR-F ilters
?

I was actually in search of a steep IR filter for a camcorder and then found this.
Can I recommend this filter, or of anyone advise against this?

Thank you
Lars



Antwort von WoWu:

Hello Lars,

why do you think such a filter need?
Your image sensor has already made a barrier filter for IR / UV. This filter differs from this, however, that he had already used 670nm. The usual blocking filters on sensors rather s.720nm.
So if you are no problems with the presentation of "dark" (Far-Red), ie in the range of 680-750 nm, you will not use it.
In addition, you'll get vignetting and image staining, at angles below 60 °.
You should be so very much to know exactly when you use a blocking filter.



Antwort von LarsProgressiv:

Hello Wolfgang,

thanks for the reply.
"WoWu" wrote: Hello Lars,

why do you think such a filter need?
Due to the bright display of red flowers and green plants in sunlight (too bright colors). In any case, I move that in my inexperience on IR disturbing proportions. I can obviously only be checked when I create a filter to the test did.
The idea that I got hierher.

"WoWu" wrote: hierher.

This filter differs from this, however, that he had already used 670nm. hierher.


Where did you get this information? I found no blocking in the network curve, because I do not know what the manufacturers initials "B & W" stands.

hierher.

"WoWu" wrote: hierher.

In addition, you'll get vignetting and image staining, at angles below 60 °. hierher.


You mean hoiffentlich but at angles above 60 ° or? For a KB-43mm focal of all angles of 53.5 ° below.

hierher.

"WoWu" wrote: hierher.

You should be so very much to know exactly when you use a blocking filter. hierher.


That I do not see it. Unless you think it was pity for the beautiful Money. Then you did right. But otherwise, the content filter only one that can not be used when you bought it.

Regards
Lars



Antwort von Bernd E.:

"LarsProgressiv" wrote: ... because I do not know what the manufacturers initials "B & W" stands ...
B + W is one of Schneider Kreuznach: http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/fotofilter/index.htm



Antwort von WoWu:

Hello Lars ..



Quote: I can obviously only be checked when I create a filter to the test did.
That's true of course ... but it can also be synonymous, that the effect of the slight blue tint then arises because such a filter only in a very wide Rotbereich work.
But you did right, of course, try it is not bad. Achte only that color so you do not get.
Quote: Where did you get this information? I found no blocking in the network graph
Here is the lock curve:
http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/tipps/uv-ir_cut_filter.htm

Quote: You mean hoiffentlich but at angles above 60 °
I mean, everything weitwinkliger than 60 °, which means that you already quite early onset vignetting so get because oblique incident light cyan staining results. This is s.den 30 Cating layers, with which the filter works and is fairly typical for such a filter.
The only exception that I know of so far come of Tiffen. The use a yellowish-green color, which completely neutralized by the White balance and will not lead to vignetting. Any other filter that I know, mean.
Quote: You mean it was pity for the beautiful Money.
If you have the desired effect can not reach, yes.
But try's from ... if it does not work you can yes the filter if necessary to send back.
Poste times what it has become.



Antwort von Frank B.:

I got me the (the) UV / IR Cut 486 of B + W recently in the Bay auction. Previously, I had but not much leisure time and try this.
Video cameras to take all cases on IR radiation, what is with the IR remote control of a diode very well may be visible. When I SonyFX 1, so synonymous is the case, but not so intense as I have previously seen with other cameras have. The IR / UV Cut filter removes my Cam synonymous these last IR rays.
Whether he sees the video brings something, I can with the naked eye have not yet seen. Do me, as I said, synonymous not very intense so that you can employ. Also, I have no instruments available to measure an improvement could be noted. That would be maybe something for a video magazine with good laboratory.
Since the filter is a slightly greenish tint, it is certainly advisable to perform manual white balance.
I have the filter, as I said, bought into the Bay. He was so favorable, as only a UV-cut filter (without IR-blocking feature). Since I've just added.
If I had more time, I want the recordings with and without the filter times in direct Comparison consider. But I have no doubt that the differences with the naked eye can detect. Damage to the filter but can not synonymous, since he obviously really the residual IR radiation eliminated.
Perhaps the assessment of the filter for me synonymous so hard because of FX 1 home already is not the strongest. Possibly. are more modern HD camcorders rather sharp gains visible. For me just at first glance not.
I have the filter as lens protection always s.der Camera. Vignetierungen are absent.

Frank



Antwort von WoWu:

Hi Frank,
thanks for the info.
The only problem I see is that you two (almost) the same filter (a filter on the sensor, s.etwa 720nm and a filter in front of the optics (in this case s.680nm) insertion. This gives you around. 60 barrier layers.
Unevenness (half wavelength, ie approximately 0.0003 mm) lead in the coating has significant image deterioration with respect to partial blurring and positive reflections in the layer. Since you can only really be happy about each layer, which you do not have. Vignetting, you'll only get the area wide. I have so far (up to the Tiffen) no filter in hand held, these effects do not somehow nature, would have shown.
The BW I know from my own opinion does not ... perhaps the effect is not so conspicuous.
Quote: Damage to the filter but can not synonymous, since he obviously really the residual IR radiation eliminated.
In any case, it eliminates the critical zone of 680 to 720nm, in the Far-red problem which is ... may be that Lars so yes his problem in the control. We will know.
Just remember you may just not be synonymous, that each glass element in the beam negatively impact .... at best "only" by a loss of light ... and that, where everyone in the tiny chips to the last quarter of Aperture fights.
This filter always look so innocent enough ... but they are pretty in themselves.



Antwort von Frank B.:

Yes, Wolfgang, of these technical (optical) questions I have, unfortunately, not so much clue. I had a simple objective sought to be yes and UV-cut filter is recommended. Somewhere I once read that the IR radiation on the image converters more errors than the UV radiation. So I thought, a combination of UV-IR cut can not be wrong. Mir is already clear that today, both good camcorder filter have already built. Since my camera is still the IR radiation of a remote control, I assume that the built-in filter is not the complete spectrum of infrared radiation were eliminated. As mentioned, optical, I see at first glance no different from the recordings without the filter. In a few weeks, I leave and then certainly some time a few shots in critical situations with and without the filter compared to.
At the moment, in the present situation, I can no recommendation for the purchase of the filter, at least not in the required price range of about 100, - euros. I have him in the bay but for 28, Euro-only anden. So it was no big risk for me to buy him.
Synonymous but I should be very interested s.Erfahrungsberichten other users.

Frank