Cameras - Canon 40D (Converted to infra-red only - 700nm)

Nine Springs, Yeovil - Canon 40D (IR), Pentax 50mm - 1/500th, f/1.2, iso100

I was getting on so well with infra-red photography on the Canon G9 that I was starting to crave a more serious camera. At this point the idea of combining IR with a fast shutter response, a large optical viewfinder and the higher image quality of a digital SLR was just too tempting. I did some research and decided to sell the G9 to fund the purchase of a Canon 40D and conversion. This would be the next step in my infra-red project.

Shortly before this I managed to swap some old equipment for a Canon 5D. This was my first experience with a full-frame DSLR and using a 50mm f/1.2 lens was making me quite addicted to bokeh (shallow depth of field blur). This was partly responsible for pushing me away from Nikon and towards Canon for conversion to IR as I was more tempted to put money into Canon glass at this point.

Unlike the G9 I didn't buy the 40D already converted, although I did choose it with conversion in mind from the start. I took some 'normal' colour images with it for a couple of weeks before sending it to Germany for conversion, in mid 2008.

The Pentax MX film camera next to the cropped sensor Canon 40D with Pentax adapter

Another aspect that pushed me towards Canon when choosing an SLR to convert to infra-red was the lens options. Despite being a bit of a Nikon fan-boy at this time I moved to Canon for a couple of reasons. The first was that Canon have wider aperture prime lenses available (albeit at a cost), but perhaps an even better reason was that the Canon mount can take lenses from almost any other manufacturer. This is made possible by simple, small and very cheap adapters that don't require any optics to degrade image quality.

The first image in this post was taken using a Pentax 50mm f/1.2 lens on the Canon 40D. This is shown in the above photo next to an old Pentax film camera for scale. Although you're stuck with manual focus on third-party lenses, this is actually quite useful for infra-red photography anyway. As an extra bonus there are some good bargains to be had with older manual focus lenses and this is equally true of low-light prime lenses (like these).

Canon 5D, 50mm - 1/60th, f/4.5, iso100

Perhaps my second biggest reason for choosing the Canon 40D for IR conversion was a new feature it had: Live-view (LV). I like high contrast black & white filters, but I also like colour infra-red (like the Hoya R72). I didn't want to be stuck shooting only one filter type after conversion and live-view made this possible. It would allow me to shoot fast shutter speeds using IR filters in front of the lens, but I could also shoot with the optical filter on the lowest wavelength I chose for conversion. The plan was to convert the camera to the lowest wavelength of IR that I liked to shoot (700nm). I could then add a more aggressive filter to the lens and use live-view to continue shooting (see above). This worked brilliantly mostly because of how intuitive the 40D's live view was.

I have tried live-view on several Nikon cameras (D3, D600) since and I'm not sure I would recommend them as much as I would a Canon for this single feature. Nikon's LV experience was less usable and rather frustrating for general use thus far. This was the first thing to put me off converting one of the Nikon cameras (listed above) to infra-red as a new project.

Cameras (especially DSLRs) have gotten smaller, lighter and cheaper since the 40D, but now that electronic viewfinders (EVF) are getting so good I'm not sure I can keep recommending DSLRs over mirrorless cameras for infra-red conversion. If you like the idea of shooting various IR filters on a converted digital camera I would recommend one of these EVF cameras (higher is better):

• Sony A7
• Fuji X-T1
• Fuji X-E1/2
• Sony NEX 6/7
• Olympus OM-D
• Panasonic GX7

Essentially this is my personal preference of interchangeable lens cameras (ILC) that have an EVF. This order is based on sensor size, handling and lens potential. I hope to talk more about these in future posts. I could rant the list and its order for ages, but for now I will get back to the converted 40D.

The 40D made a fantastic infra-red camera for it's day. I really enjoyed shooting with it as an SLR and the live-view was not just a gimmick, it made the camera infinitely better at shooting IR. Here are some pictures while I continue to babble about my experiences shooting with the 40D (post-conversion):

Central Amsterdam - Canon 40D, 24-120mm - 1/50th, f/8, iso100

This shot has had very little processing done to it, especially in the colours. The white balance's colour temperature slider is lower than it would be with a colour image, but it's not at the bottom (2000), where I'd normally put it. Very rarely do I find the default colours from an infra-red image to be pleasing. If I do keep the colours about 90% of the time I will use the false-colour technique to process the image.

Paradise Wood, Dorset - Canon 40D, 10-22mm - 1/200th, f/8, iso100

With it's much larger sensor the 40D's improved sharpness and dynamic range really helped false colour to remain relatively free of banding and noise. Compared to the compact G9 this was a huge step up in visual quality. Although the 40D was a much heavier camera it enable me to capture moments more reliably and made for a more pleasant shooting experience overall.

Montacute - Canon 40D, 10-22mm - 1/80th, f/5.6, iso100

At some point while shooting with the converted DSLR it occurred to me that I mostly took landscape images and this might better suit a wide angle lens. I chose the Canon 10-22mm. Being relatively cheap, light and not too big it was good for a walk-around lens. Sharpness and maximum aperture were poor, but it did an OK job overall. The main thing that made me regret buying this lens was that I used it fully zoomed in almost all the time. 22mm (on the 1.6x cropped 40D) was very close to 35mm lens on full-frame. 35mm prime lenses are often available with nice wide apertures and are still very small and light. This makes great for general use and available-light photography and this realization was ultimately what drove me to buy the Fuji X100 later on (more on that soon).

Lens options in general were simply stunning on the Canon mount. Canon's own lens options are great already, add to that 3rd party options (from Sigma and Tamron etc.) things get very interesting, but the real benefit to me was the ability to use manual focus lenses from almost any manufacturer's own catalogue (Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Minolta, Zeiss, Leica etc.). The only down side for the 40D was its cropped sensor, which made wider lenses focal lengths not so ideal.

Canon 40D, 50mm - 1/5000th, f/1.2, iso100

The ability to change lenses with infra-red really amp'd up my passion for the project again. First stuck on a tripod and then limited to a mediocre lens on a tiny sensor, but no longer. If I wasn't completely hooked infra-red photography before I was now.

This image of my parent's cat (Marmite) shows how bad his camouflage is when surrounded by infra-red bushes. If only birds could see in IR huh? Well don't worry, he's a rubbish hunter anyway.

Focusing on his eye with the very shallow depth of field was only possible due to manually focusing using live-view. Since infra-red light focuses at a different distance to colour (and every lens is different) live-view really helped capture images more successfully (zooming into 1:1 pixels at the push of a button). This was a great feature for infra-red and so good was the functionality of live-view on the 40D that I often used it when there was no filter attached to the lens. A feature that I chose to act as a backup for when the optical viewfinder was unusable was now becoming a preferred way of using the camera.

Canon 40D, 50mm - 1/6th, f/1.2, iso100

After observing the effects that infra-red photography had on people's skin I was extra curious to try out studio photography. In hind sight I wish I had tried a lot more than I did, but I am glad that I got the chance to try a few. These images were all thanks to Rob Hargreves of Nimbus Photographic, for letting me join in on some of his photo shoots.

The way infra-red smooths out skin tones makes for a flattering black and white image. Colour infra-red photos are much trickier because the require a lot of tweaking to make the colours do anything useful. This is especially true when used with the false colour technique, which tends to make people look like smurfs.

   TRAVELLING WITH AN IR-DSLR

Britany, France - Canon 40D, 50mm - 1/1600th, f/1.2, iso100

I do wish that I'd used the converted 40D more as a travel camera. I found this image of Mont Saint Michel hiding in one of my folders. This is the only image that I took from this camera during the entire holiday. I had defaulted to using a normal colour camera for the holiday because I was worried the IR images would come out horrible for some reason. This was probably the only time that I took the camera out of the bag. Well, at least I have this one I guess.

Central Amsterdam - Canon 40D, 10-22mm - 1/60th, f/4, iso100

I sometimes wonder if my three year move to Amsterdam (with all that water, nature and cool buildings) wasn't somewhat responsible for encouraging me into converted infra-red photography. If it was I'm sure glad that it was part of my life, but you certainly don't need this kind of landscape to appreciate IR.

   CONCLUSION
I'm not sure I really need this section, but yes I really loved this camera in infra-red. It probably didn't quite get the attention of my main DSLR at the time (which later became the Nikon D3, oh yeah I returned to Nikon btw), but part of me loved the 40D even more. The fun of shooting older manual lenses really quite was therapeutic and reminded me of . The IR camera forced me down a route there that I may not have otherwise returned to and I love it even more for that. This combined with ethereal images and the exploration of processing techniques rekindled a love of photography for me on many occasions that colour just wasn't cutting it. 

Cameras - Canon G9 (Converted to infra-red only - 720nm)

Amsterdam - Canon G9 (IR) - 1/400th, f/5, iso80

After shooting the odd infra-red photograph with my Nikon D2H for a couple of years I found out about converted IR cameras. This fascinated me and I eventually bought a pre-converted Canon G9 from an American company called: Max-Max back in 2007. There are several companies who can convert a camera if you send it to them, but actually selling infra-red cameras directly to the consumer is unusual, even now. Most conversion companies only deal with DSLRs because their sensors are easier to reach. In America the most popular company for this is Life-Pixel, but there are many. In the UK I only know of ACS and Protech Repairs.

These were the images that I used to sell the G9 on eBay in 2008

The main attraction of having a camera converted to full-time infra-red are:

• Faster shutter speeds, thus no need for a tripod
• Higher image quality / Less noise

Higher shutter speeds allow for shooting moving subject without capturing excessive motion blur. In fact they shoot at speeds very similar to normal cameras. Motion blur can be a desirable effect on occasion, like with running water, but in general faster shutter speeds are a good thing. Not requiring a tripod is always a positive thing. Freeing you up to travel further, shoot quicker and capture a great range of subjects. The higher image quality from lower noise levels is very useful too. Noise tends to get amplified when processing infra-red images.

The main features I wanted from this pocket IR camera were: Good image quality, a flexible lens & good manual controls. In this regard I was happy with the Canon G9, but today you can find similarly sized cameras with much larger sensors (better IQ) like the Canon G1X or ILCs like the Fuji X-series. Another reason I chose the G9 was that it could shoot RAW and ultimately this was my favourite feature for infra-red. When it comes to processing IR images the extra flexibility you get with white-balance and exposure control is invaluable. Yes, you could say the same thing about colour photography, but infra-red requires a lot more manipulation of individual colour channels and dynamic range.

Vonelpark, Amsterdam - Canon G9 (IR) - 1/160th sec, f/4, iso80

A lot of the infra-red images that I took with the G9 were simply processed into black and white, although the camera did capture colour information. By default the images come out a mess of pink mess, but the channels can be manipulated to get some prettier results. Here's one I processed using the 'false-colour' method. This brings back the blue sky and one other colour (depending on how you process the image). This other colours generally responds to the subjects that come out differently in IR (leaves, grass, human skin etc.). 720nm filters are the best for this colour IR effect, but not all 720nm filters are created equal. The most popular is the Hoya R72.

Slotervaart, Amsterdam - Canon G9 (IR) - 1/320th sec, f/4, iso80

This storm cloud and rainbow (right) didn't come out with any colours. I simply processed it as a simple black and white, but I do like the tones it has. I'm glad that I've forced myself to shoot a variety of scenes, weather and subjects in infra-red, because some of the more obscure, or unusual things have produced some of the more interesting results. Although this image has the classic IR subject matter (trees and water), winter had destroyed the effect somewhat. As you can see the grass and trees are showing their typical bright tones, but other elements, like the water and reeds, are providing some nice contrast.

My favourite aspect from this image is the falling rain, lit up in front of the dark clouds behind. This contrast and dynamic range in the clouds seems to come out much better with infra-red photography, where a normal colour image would struggle to capture these tones while being exposed for the landscape.

Central Amsterdam - Canon G9 (IR) - 1/60th sec, f/3.2, iso80

Here's an example of the high contrast you can get when the conditions are good. A clear blue sky creates a very dark tone with infra-red, mix this with the bright tones of well lit trees and it creates a very dynamic image.

Central Amsterdam - Canon G9 - 1/320th sec, f/5, iso80

Amsterdam was great for having a lot of water around the city, but it did rather lack in dynamic landscapes. It was, however, also great for street photography. People there were very comfortable having their pictures taken. You might think this is true of any capital city, but London is oh so not the same! There seems to be a much more laid back atmosphere in Amsterdam and no, I don't think it has anything to do with the drugs. Having an IR camera that can take fast enough exposures to capture people without motion blur is a huge bonus. Generally speaking you need to have a converted camera for this although there are some exceptions to this. Older cameras like the Nikon D70 and D2H were good for this, but even some recent ones, like the Fuji X100 (more about this one later).

North Amsterdam - Canon G9 - 1/400th sec, f/5, iso80

Here's an example of the colours you get directly out of the converted camera verses a heavily processed version ('false colour'). To achieve this result you first need to manipulate your white-balance to get the optimum levels for each colour channel. Once you open the image in your editing software you'll need to swap the red and blue channels around. Finally each colour channel will need a bit of tweaking to balance the colours (I usually use curves) and get the desired effect.

After I've done a post for each of the cameras I've used to take IR images I will dedicate a post to describing the 'false-colour' process in more detail.

North Amsterdam - Canon G9 (IR) - 1/250th, f/5, iso80

As you can see by exif data of the images shot from the converted Canon G9 there is no issue with slow shutter speeds. In fact on many occasions it was possible to shoot faster settings with this than with a normal colour camera. This seemed to happen mostly with evening shots where the sun was going down. Trees can often still look quite bright and interesting during these conditions, so perhaps it rather depends on the subject matter that you're shooting.

Amsterdam - Canon G9 (IR) - 1/320th, f/5, iso80

Skin tones come out bright and clear with infra-red. The china doll-like effect is considerably more more pretty than what happens when you shoot in the UV spectrum. It's even prettier than the tones you get from turning a normal colour image black and white too. There are a couple of odd things to watch out for however. Eyes can look rather freaky, teeth can look dark and veins sometimes appear more prominently than you'll expect.

If you're using the false-colour technique skin tones come out a rather unhealthy blue hue as well, but in general the tones you'll get are pretty flattering. On a side note - it's not necessarily a bad thing, but some tinted glasses can appear completely transparent. The same effect happens with Coke too, but that's something for later.

Amsterdam - Canon G9 (IR) - 1/25th, f/2.8, iso80

This image is looking through the viewfinder of a Yashica Mat 124G. This was my friends camera and he let me borrow it for this experiment. The lens that I'm looking through here is an 80mm f/3.5 I think. The shallow depth of field effect is pretty decent (although not quite as wide an aperture as the one it takes the photograph through). It was very nice to be able to see a shallow depth of field while seeing infra-red, since the G9's sensor didn't allow for much depth blur at all.

North Amsterdam - Canon G9 (IR) - 1/500th sec, f/5, iso80

Bright sunlight reflects well from grass and plants. This, in turn, lights up objects around it. One big down side to IR is that foliage which is often multi-coloured in visible light usually looks pretty flat in infra-red. You can get interesting depth & detail here too, although it's really helped along by strong shadows and this can be hard to see in visible light. When shooting with a non-converted SLR this is pure guesswork and experience, but with a converted camera that all changes. When you can see the effect of the infra-red colours & tones live through a converted display it really speeds up the learning process of IR photography. For me this didn't kill any of the magic, it only heightened my interest in the spectrum and my IR projects continued...