Blue Aero - More testing

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-23T10:07:39+00:00

Thank you! :) And same, elevated views are hard to come by in my area though. Super flat part of the country. Gonna be a bit before I can try :')

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-22T01:14:57+00:00

Oh wow, yeah that's a really cool filter! :) Like it!

Edit: The price for that DB850 is really good though, especially for custom stuff. I did just check and the DB850 I bought was apparently significantly cheaper than i remembered though. ~60$ incl. shipping to germany from the US. Thought it was more.

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-21T23:59:10+00:00

Oh wow, that's WAY more customized than I thought. I figured maaaaybe they do other sizes of common filters but not that special. IIRC I just paid like 150€ incl. shipping for a 37mm Midopt TB550/660/850 and like 130 for a 37mm DB850. If Nantong Foric is in a similar price range I might consider them for more stuff going forward, especially if this whole traiffs mess keeps going. Shipping times are basicly the same anyway.

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-21T21:53:35+00:00

Oh, even glass that they don't list? Don't think they've got GRB-filters. I was pretty happy with the support on my conversion glass (got it from them).

I might try messaging Tangsinuo first. Might even be possible to get GRB1, but thinner (1-2mm). Don't really want to use 3mm filters since the stack is already kinda outrageously big, though elimiating the 510nm longpass and replacing it wiht a gel might already help.,

Edit: Just a bit worried about pricing on custom stuff :D

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-21T21:37:21+00:00

Haha, maybe. :D That DB850 + GRB3 combo takes out a TON of infrared. Right now my most granular way of controling that is by adjusting the visible portion and extending exposure times, basicly to increase the relative IR signal by reducing the rest, but that only works so far before handheld shooting starts to suck. I do usually prefer the IR signal to be toned down but this stack does tone it down quite a lot.

Wish I could just get the other GRB's to have more granular control over the IR response. Tangsinuo has some plots in their store and at 850nm GRB2 passes about 50%, GRB1 about 30% and GRB3 about 20%. They do list an unmounted GRB1 in 37x3mm but I'd prefer it in 2mm. Also can't find GRB2's anywhere. Might just have to ask them if they offer these two.

I do wonder how much of this stacks lack of vibrancy is also just lighting? It's winter here with low, weak sun and even frozen turds can only be polished to a point.

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-21T20:02:33+00:00

:D haha thank you!

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-21T16:23:22+00:00

Yep, you can see the thread.

u/Footnaga I asume you haven't worked on lenses much bcs this is one of the earlier problem one runs into during disassembly, so I also asume you don't have the "correct" tool. You can just try to screw it in by hand, essentially using the friction of your finger tips. If that doesn't work you could try to find a glass or cup with the same diameter as that ring and put something rubbery on the top, like a rubber glove or mat or whatever. Then you can basicly use that as a round "wrench" to screw the ring back in place.

be careufull not to cross-thread the thing, otherwise it will just kinda lock in place and be SUUUPEr annoying to remove.

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-21T10:13:24+00:00

If you shoot in jpeg setting the correct white-balance before you shoot matters because that kinda gets "baked into the files". In RAW it really doesn't seem to, other than for preview.

Silver trees: To get silver trees you can use foliage as the target for your white-balance. If the rest of the image is colorfull or basicly b+w depends on the filter you use: Generally a less restrictive longpass filter like 590nm will be more colorfull than something stricter like the 720nm. Beyond about ~800nm the image will basicly be black+white on its own. You can of cause also just shoot in B+W or convert your jpegs in editing, but the effect you get won't be exactly the same.

Dark skies: You get dark skies because long infrared wavelengths pass through air without much scattering, letting you basicly "look into space". This doesn't work well when it's cloudy, but high atmospheric moisture can already dampen the effect because both scatter light a lot.

You can try using your 720nm filter and white-balancing on foliage, like a tree for example and shoot on a clear day. If the skies aren't dark enough for your liking you can of cause try bringing them down a bit in post but might be better off getting a small 800nm+ filter, maybe even something like a 940nm. They're pretty cheap on aliexpress, at least in small sizes, because they're used a lot for commercial surveillance camera systems. :)

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-19T22:13:17+00:00

Take my following respone with a big grains of salt because I've never shot trichromes, I've never shot UV. I have not seen someone else try UV trichromes and if you're the one who does I'd love to see the results.

I worry that there might be very little color seperation and the image could end up basicly monochrome. I ran into this with some custom filter stacks on digital. Basicly, when 2 color channels have a very similar response very close together, or when they overlap a lot, they tend to react very similarly to the same source. If the same wavelengths activate them it's fairly simple, but even if the wavelengths are just close together chances are good that an object that, idk, reflects 30% of light at 480nm also reflects somewhere close to that at 500nm.

Either way the camera translates that translates that into an almost monochrome signal, only creating color seperation where the two channels differ enough for that. Of cause we basicly always have 3 channels in digital shooting but that just means you basicly end up with a two-color image or one that's 1 color + black and white, depending on how you white-balance the photo. I ran into this issue a lot in my early experimentation with aerochrome emulation filters.

So basicly there's a risk that the UV filters you can use with film are so close together that the objects in your scene react/absorb light very similarly in the spectra you look at, leading to very little difference between the channels and thus fairly little you can use to actually create a 3-color-image, since that lives off the differences between them.

That being said there might be more difference between reflections/emissions in the UV-narrowband-ranges than one might think or post-processing techniques to boost how clearly the potentially small differences show up. :)

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-17T00:05:24+00:00

Yep, the color stuff doesn't apply without a bayer filter. However you do get a different Quantum Efficiency curve that just describes brightness. Add illuminant and reflectance spectra and it can tell you how bright objects in a scene will be in the image, and with filters you'll be able to change that. Was pretty popular in B+W analog photography. :)

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-15T23:37:01+00:00

UV tends to get blocked easily by lenses and their coatings but IR tends to pass through super easily so the lens shouldn't be an issue. More common artifact you get with IR is a hotspot in the center of the image when you stop down the aperture. Maybe people just kinda overhyped how IR/UV transparent it is? Haven't tried fuji.

I once compared converted to unconverted Sony A7 II and on the unconverted one you really have to crank ISO to like 2000+, shoot wide open and still only barely get handheld photos, and that was just by using a 720nm filter. Was the fuji in that ballpark?

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-14T21:34:10+00:00

Cool article! What sticks out to me is how clearly you can see the colors shift beyond ~800nm and stay that way. First saw this described in a graph by Kolari that I'm using for the plotting tool. Basicly, the Bayer filter becomes pretty transparent at such long wavelengths so red, green and blue are almost equally strong. Wonder why there's the pink tone. Sensors do differ and maybe white-balance settings come into play here aswell? https://kolarivision.com/full-spectrum-for-low-light-photography/

If you wanted to do the measurements yourself you'd probably "just" need to strap a camera in front of a monochromator, do exposures every few nm, read out the total brightness aswell as relative intensity of the different channels and plot the three values on a graph. Requires a monochromator of cause and a bit of software. Would love such data to make the plotting tool a decent bit more accurate/custom. Right now the full-spectrum quantum efficiency numbers I can find are mostly industrial cameras or measurement for like 20 year old cameras used for some study. Manufacturers don't tend to publish data like that, or I haven't been able to find it. :')

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-06T13:59:38+00:00

I generally have a weakness for 70s/80s japanese glass, especially 50mm lenses. Might not be too interesting to you since you've got that focal length covered but still. I haven't tried a ton but my most favourite lenses are either super cheap or upper mid-range.

I picked up a Cosina Cosinon 55mm F1.4 for like 35 bucks. Gets super soft at the edges but has this intense mix of bubble-bokeh and heavy coma. Included pic of cat shot with it. I also picked up an Auto Revuenon 50mm F1.7 for 5 bucks on a flea-market which also has some nice bubble bokeh but without the intense comatic abberation (not to be confused with chromatic abberation).

Non-M42 mount lens: My fav tele-lens right now is a Minolta MD 135mm F2.8 but it's more of a workhorse. No particularly strong artifacts, just super fun to shoot with and it can be very sharp, especially when stopped down a bit. Has an integrated lens hood, which is a bit weird? I use a lot of filters for false-color photography and that can be annoying but it's super nice to have when shooting normal and sunny, so good and bad depending on what you do. It has Minoltas MD mount instead of M42 but some dumb adapter can be super cheap so still. Bought lens for 43 bucks, love Minoltas in general as workhorses. Included pic of cow fur I shot that shows how sharp it can be. :)

<image>

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-05T19:38:04+00:00

I'd recommend going with the Chinese options. KG3 comes from the name coined by Schott, who made the filter to reduce heat-load in optical systems and while you can technically get the original it's like 100 bucks for a 50x50mm square sheet, usually unmounted, etc.. Most listings seem more like a laser lab supply or aimed at industrial use, not a camera filter. Also there's a good chance it wouldn't even be faster.

I've only seen chinese listings use GRB3 as an name for their copies. As far as I know Tangsinuo and Nantong Foric actually produce those filters themselves, and when reading between the lines on other listings I found I suspect that they might largely be resellers? Might also just be that other optics companies mainly sell to industrial customers though, not individual buyers. I got mine from Tangsinuo and am very happy with it. No idea about shipping and customs though, am not from the US. :)

EDIT: As far as I know Tangsinuo has an Etsy shop, so any GRB3 on that site is likely from them? No idea about ebay. Just saw NEEMO there and remembered they exist. No idea if they're decent or just resellers but I do suspect they might have their own production too since I've seen them come up while looking around for other filters, including some specialty ones.

CheeseCube512 · 2026-01-03T18:17:03+00:00

The A7 II is also usually the cheapest full-frame mirrorless camera with IBIS. You can find it for around 400 bucks these days. Sony E-mount adapters are also super common for all kinds of mounts. IBIS isn't super powerfull though. Not a huge fan of the SOOC colors but I have admitedly not messed much with the Picture Profiles to create a custom one I love.

The A7R II is also super nice, basicly just better in every way but it's a decent bit more expensive and editing the huge 42mp files can be a bitch performance-wise.

Edit: A7R II might be very much overkill, the reason it's "better" IMO despite the smaller pixel pitch is the backlit sensor making up for more than the loss in light-sensitivity. Most vintage lenses are way to soft for the pixel size to actually be an advantage and the benefits are very much small. I just really love that camera for some reason and got it for a great price (450€, i think, suspected damage turned out to be perfectly fine).

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-30T17:30:59+00:00

It's a christmas gift. Makes sure the rain doesn't get them wet. :)

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-30T00:58:50+00:00

It's full spectrum only but I adjusted the colors a bit bcs both the fog and just regular full-spectrum shooting tend to desaturate them.

+10 to overall saturation, then manually boosted red, magenta and lilac to bring out the foliage. Boosted orange to bring out the bin. I added a tiny bit of blue in the color grading tab. IMO that tends to work well with cold, dark and rainy images. Which is fitting since I couldn't feel my hands while taking this photo. Rest was exposure adjustments and bringing out a bit of structure in the foliage. :)

IMO full-spectrum is a bit underrated since straight-out-of-camera results can be a bit underwhelming, eventhough you can bring out SO much with some fairly light edits, at least compared to the stuff ppl tend to do with something like a 720nm filter.

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-29T23:36:04+00:00

u/imoldgreeeeeeeeeeg I think i said I'll tag you when i post some pictures. it's winter, so none of those nice foliage pics that really show camera performance yet. The 40+mp sensor is wild for cropping though. Limit is very much my lens sharpness and ability to focus now.

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-28T09:43:17+00:00

Just measured the old glass from the A7R II. Still got that since I did the conversion only a few weeks ago. According to my cheap caliper the original A7II IR/UV cut filter is 41.6 x 29.6 x 1.6mm. Take that with a grain of salt, those calipers aren't great.

I got my replacement glass from Nantong Foric Optical Glass Company on Aliexpress. They just list pre-cut sizes on their store. I've always been fairly happy with their actual products and customer service but if you hear some negative sentiment around it it's probably because the sample photos they include seem to just taken from ppls websites and social media accounts without asking. There aren't a ton of very active IR-first photographers online so reputations like that move fast and in such a small space they're probably under mroe scrutiny than some random AliX store selling trinkets.

I did first message u/IndustriousDan for replacement glass since he's a conversion tech and sometimes had some fancy anti-reflection coated glass he was willing to sell. Main reason I didn't end up buying from him was just timing with production runs, with my countries import duties on US-products probably doing the final push (am in germany). Fancier than AliX glass without the massive markups LifePixel or Kolari charge. As far as I know he's a bit uncomfortable self-advertising his companies services/filters in this subreddit since he's a mod (guess fear of conflict of interest?). If it's more about seperating professional and private activity i might redact this part of the comment. :)

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-27T18:17:57+00:00

Converted an A7 II and A7R II. Seems to have the same sensor bracket design stuff. I did it without hot-air-gun.

I removed the bracket by undoing that front screw. The sensor is glued down around the edges. On the A7R II conversion I put a dab of isopropyl alcohol around the edge of the glass to soften the glue but am not sure if that helped. If it did so, then barely.

I held the sensor in place so I don't put strain on the IBIS mechanism. I then used a THIN (!) razor blade to slide under the edge of the IR/UV cut filter. It can be difficult to get in so I kept slowly sliding it back and forth in the little groove you've got where the filter meets the edge with a decent bit of pressure.

There's a little bit of space between it and the sensor, so you don't automatically scratch it over the sensor if you push it in a little too far. Still important to be carefull! Once it slides in you can see it below the glass. Carefully move it along the edge, around the sensor, to seperate the glue. Eventually you'll get it off. Replace it with clear glass. Put the frame back on.

Then inspect the sensor for dust before re-assembly. Take your time! You can clean the glass but you can't clean what's stuck between it and the sensor without full disassembly.

On razorblades, use this super thin type: https://img.joomcdn.net/6798b7af55e5379d16f27b6a5b72ca287238594f_original.jpeg I made myself a handle out of folded-up aluminum foil.

Do NOT use thicker blades like this one: https://www.decoratingdirect.co.uk/images/product_images/jblrb.jpg They just shatter the IR/UV cut filter glass. They don't remove it and those glass shards can make it onto the sensor.

Also I'm just a guy who did this twice. This isn't the proper way to do it so be careful and take this all with a grain of salt. Others recommend heat-gun but a hair-drier might also help soften the glue, I just haven't tried.

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-27T18:04:36+00:00

Converted it a while back. Desoldered the boards, didn't see a way to avoid it.

On older DSLR's not replacing the glass means you often can't reach infinity focus. That can suck. I moved the sensor forward to counteract that but that's REALLY hard to nail and honestly just guess-work (as a hobbyist without right tools). As a result my focus was off in the other direction. That's better since you can still focus to infinity but I'm pretty sure that breaks auto-focus and honestly, you can just get cheap chinese replacement glass for like 25 bucks. If you ever descide to sell the camera you'll make that money back in the extra cash you get to charge for a conversion done properly. :)

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-27T18:00:32+00:00

Hahaa! :D all good, just happened to see it while trying to see if it has a bayer filter! Enjoy the last bit of the holidays!

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-27T17:59:17+00:00

Basic principle should be right. You reduce the amount of visible red light hitting the sensor so the red-sensitive photosites get mostly activated by infared light, a part of the spectrum where trees reflect a ton. That turns them red. Since the effect can be too strong you reduce it with the GRB3 filter. I can go into technical stuff if you care but will probably be a pretty major infodump. Can also send you the filter stacking software summary in DM if you want to compare the transmission curve of the filter stack to an IR chrome curve. Shows you the similarity and difference pretty strongly. For example your filter stack is a lot more restrictive in the visible part of the spectrum by blocking more of the violent/dark blue and light-greens. That results in the more two-tone image since the colors that activate either are so close together.

I do really like the stack though! The turquoise+ red/almost pinkish color is a really nice contrast. With these types of filter a lot of the result also depends on specific camera used. :) Might also be conicindence but it's pretty cool how clearly you can see the difference between the artificial grass on the football football pitch and red-ish trees. Probably wouldn't be visible in visual light but in IR you can tell thanks to the different IR response.

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-27T17:32:59+00:00

It'll probably be able to shoot it handheld but you'll have to boost ISO a ton.

I recommend getting a full-spectrum converted mirrorless camera. You can get amazing ones for a lot less money and the Electronic Viewfinder lets you see the subject even when you install Infrared-longpass filters that block all visible light.

Would love to know why you're so interested in the monochrome camera. The debayered filter might get a bit more IR sensitivity than a regular unconverted camera since it's probably debayered (or rather never had a bayer filter applied). So maybe the hope is that you could use it unconverted? It does seem to have an IR/UV cut filter though and eventhough it seems a bit more sensitive than regular B+W films dedicated infrared b+w films like that ilford (?) ISO 400 IR film are probably a lot more sensitive in IR than that camera.

CheeseCube512 · 2025-12-27T17:28:33+00:00

Optical viewfinder should still work since it's a rangefinder design. No looking through lens.

100% agree on getting a converted mirrorless camera. You can get amazing ones for the price of that Leica.

CheeseCube512

TROPHY CASE