Have you used an IR converted camera?

I’m been mulling over having my Fuji X-T20 converted to IR by these folks: https://www.lifepixel.com

Has anyone else has a conversion done by them?

Which filter would you have put in the camera?

Any other links and resources would be awesome.

Hi @paperdigits,

Unfortunately, one cannot search the forum for IR
(it’s too short), but infra will turn up a few interesting posts.

You could also circumvent that problem by googling for
IR site:pixls.us which, among other things, will give you this:

Have fun!
Claes in Lund, Sweden

I’ve definitely been tempted too but in the end couldn’t quite justify the cost. I’d most likely go full spectrum and then work with filters.

Same for me. I ended up buying a 680nm filter. For one or two times each summer when I try something is enough.

I went for 590nm but purchased an already-converted camera, though I haven’t quite got my head around how to get a consistent exposure yet. This (or even full spectrum) gives you a bit of flexibility as you can always put on a 720nm or higher filter later. The longer the wavelength of your internal filter, the fewer options to change your mind after the fact.

I’ll probably flit between 590 and 720 with mine. Lifepixel has quite a few useful articles once you’ve had your camera converted.

@paperdigits Important question: Why?

What are your hopes/ideas/goals/targets/whatever?

Have fun!
Claes in Lund, Sweden

To have more fun and make more images! I think the IR look is interesting, both the false color and the black and white.

I always wanted to do IR when I shot film, but the filter and repeated cost of the film kept me from getting into it at all. Now I have the means to make it happen, so, why not?

Yep. That is a fully valid reason! :slight_smile:

Also I may try and grab an X-T3 when/if it goes on sale with the release of the X-T4… So then the X-T20 would be a spare body :wink:

Bad memory. Are some consumer cameras made with IR sensitive sensors? Or are most if not all of them converted?

My understanding is that the sensor captures a lot of the spectrum, but has a filter in front of it.

That’s correct - most digital sensors are highly sensitive in the infrared part of the spectrum and have an IR cut filter (or ‘hot mirror’) in front of them to prevent infrared light reaching the sensor. The conversion process involves removing the IR cut filter and replacing it with one that instead prevents all or most visible light from reaching the sensor, but allows IR to pass through. A full-spectrum conversion just replaces it with a piece of clear glass.

My first camera conversion was a cheap point-and-shoot and I did it myself by simply removing the IR cut filter and then super-gluing a step-up ring to the front of the camera to hold circular IR filters.

Thanks for the refresher. Since the sensor isn’t designed for IR, I bet it doesn’t cover that end of the spectrum as well as specialty cameras. Nevertheless, it would be fun to have a converted camera. :slight_smile:

Indeed. The quality will vary since the cameras aren’t specifically designed for infrared. However, the technology behind the sensors is fairly standard so AFAIK they mostly have similar IR sensitivity once the IR cut filter is removed. It does make you see the world in a whole different way and (the big bonus for me) it’s best in bright midday sunlight when most photographer’s are dormant!

I’m not aware that there are any specialty cameras for infrared - or at least none designed for ‘artistic’ photography - I suspect that any available would be more for specific scientific purposes.

I’m not aware that there are any specialty cameras for infrared - or at
least none designed for ‘artistic’ photography - I suspect that any
available would be more for specific scientific purposes.

Didn’t Sigma have one? Somewhere deep down my memory I seem to remember that,
back in early(?) 2000 there was a digital camera that was convertible
on-the-fly to shoot IR.

If I’m not mistaken about the above than this would probably the proverbial
exception :slight_smile:

I’ll do a search when I have a bit more time.

Are you referring to the removable dust filter on the SD1 and SD15 (https://blog.sigmaphoto.com/2012/sigma-sd1-and-sd15-for-digital-infrared-photography-by-jack-howard/)? It’s not 100% clear whether this was a design decision in order to allow for infrared photography or just to allow the sensor to be cleaned, with a infrared as a side-effect. Given that the user manuals for these cameras only reference the removal of the filter for sensor cleaning (they don’t mention infrared) I would assume the latter.


Did some searching and I am talking about the SD10 (2003) or, more likely the SD14 (2007).

Neither specifically mention it being a side effect, then again I cannot find any official mention by Sigma that is was designed to do so to begin with. The only hint I get is that it was made easier on the SD14 to remove the IR/UV blocking filter.

Bot are mentioned here [Wikipedia] when talking about the Foveon X3 sensor.

Ok looks like same principle but different models. Similarly, the user manuals only mention removal to allow sensor cleaning so I doubt they were designed specifically with infrared in mind.

1 Like

You’re probably right about that! 'Twas nice of them to make the filter removal easier though.

1 Like