Got me a Canon SL1 to convert to IR

David_S85 · July 24, 2014

This will be my log on why I got one of these little pups and the decisions I will go through to have LifePixel convert it to IR.

I had ordered this through Canon USA's online store as a refurb, which had it on sale at $359 ($499 new). Eight months ago, I barely missed getting the same model at about the same low price, but this time I didn't hesitate. I've had a Canon 10-22 lens in mothballs for a while and this will allow it to return to see some use.

Arrived today. Small it is. I guess I had forgot just how small. Battery charging now and I just cleared an old SDHC card for use in the SL1.

More (and pics) as they happen…

Comments are welcome in this thread. Have you had an IR conversion done recently? Please share your thoughts and ideas.

David_S85 · July 24, 2014

It's SMALL! Canon S95 at left, SL1 middle and 5DIII at right.

I couldn't wait for the little green light on the battery charger to be full. Took it out for a spin and shot 30 stupid pictures of the side of the house and some cars. Being a recent STM design, the 40mm pancake focuses much much faster than the old 10-22 in live view touch focus mode. I found not much difference in focusing speed using the viewfinder and half-press shutter button method between the two lenses. Good: The SL1's ver. 1.0.0 firmware did recognize the 40mm lens immediately where my 5DIII's newest firmware still can't.

Bad: My older copy of Canon's DPP (3.13.0) can't see the RAW files so I don't know how it did yet. :cry Gotta update. Hopefully that will solve it.
EDIT: Updated to the newest version of DPP and it works great.

Comments are welcome in this thread. Have you had an IR conversion done recently? Please share your thoughts and ideas.

ziggy53 · July 25, 2014

Fantastic! Can't wait to see the IR images after the conversion.

clap

cmason · July 25, 2014

Wow, thats a wee thing! Of course if you swapped lenses on the SL1 and 5D, it might not look as tiny!

pathfinder · July 25, 2014

Hi David, yes, I recently joined the IR shooters club too.

I had a Lumix GH2 hanging around unused, so I had LifePixel convert it to SuperColor IR

I am still in my infancy in the processing of these files - Lightroom won't recognize them correctly for Raw editing apparently. All the red bits seem to confuse the RAW engine in LR with the standard Adobe Profiles for the GH2. Canon's DPP seems to work ok with Canon IR Raw files, but the Lumix files require a new profile for Adobe PS Or LR Raw engine.

I contacted LifePixel and they responded quickly with a video explaining how to make a new profile with the Adobe DNG profile maker software. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke8If0LXWQ0

I made a new profile with my Passport color checker and the Adobe DNG Profile maker, and I now have b&W images seen in my Lightroom files when I use the new custom profile. Some of my new IR images can be seen here. They will be noted in the exif data as shot with a Lumix GH2 - http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/Travel/Mono-Lake-WS-June-2014/42706727_2JRzzg#!i=3364805198&k=rWchK7W I am still trying to learn the ins and outs of IR processing in Photoshop

David_S85 · July 26, 2014

cmason wrote: »

Wow, thats a wee thing! Of course if you swapped lenses on the SL1 and 5D, it might not look as tiny!

Yes. I was thinking of mounting a 400 on the SL1 to see what would happen, but then thought the gravity of that lens lens might suck the little SL1 right on inside it and I'd never get it back out. There are some things that should never be done.

David_S85 · July 26, 2014

Jim,

Thanks for chipping in. Congrats on the conversion. Looked at your recent gallery and looks like it works splendidly. Odd that LR couldn't accept the RAW's due to the content. Glad you got it straightened out and goon on LifePixel for finding the solution. Lots of editing options on that super color filter. I'm thinking just going with the normal 715nm filter like my old Hoya 72R. I don't see myself doing more than the basic B&W dark sky/water and white clouds and foliage thing. Maybe color swapping of red/blue at the most. That, and the conversions are pretty straight forward even in DPP. I guess I'm more of a traditionalist with IR. I know I can edit for dark sky B&W's with that one, but the yellows don't do anything for me (at least not yet - I have about a week to send it in).

One of the reasons of doing this will hopefully get me out more in mid-day at 10am and 2pm when IR light is best (and color photography is worst).

Here's one from last summer with a Hoya filter on the the 40mm pancake. I've had luck with that method in the past, but for some reason the 40mm pancake and the filter create nasty weird blooming near all the edges even though the rest is perfectly in focus. I used live view zoomed in to focus the below shot. That, and the 90 second exposure times just make filters an unpleasant shooting experience.

David_S85 · July 26, 2014

Some SL1 discoveries. RAW+JPEG can only be JPEG Large high quality. Can't select any other JPEG choice unless you shoot JPEG's only. The buffer is only two shots with a 30MB/s card when shooting continuous. I have a 45MB/s card on order. I'm not too worried about this as I didn't get the SL1 to be a sports camera. The dedicated ISO button on the top is a handy thing. Canon buried the mirror lockup in the custom settings again, but luckily it can be brought into the My Menu settings. The dynamic range on this one sucks. There's a Highlight Tone Priority setting (also buried and My Menu available) that should pretty much always be left active - which keeps you at ISO 200 and above. Noise in dark areas is a problem with all higher ISO's on this camera.

EDIT: With the faster card now in, I can get up to three continuous shots in high speed burst, if I shoot RAW and no additional JPEGs.

David_S85 · July 30, 2014

Post #7 above shows severe "blooming" near all the edges of an IR using the Hoya R72 filter, but with a full frame camera. A similar test shot with the SL1 yesterday displays absolutely no blooming effect at any edge. The difference was simply full frame to cropped sensor. I might conclude that the 40mm / Hoya combo just doesn't work well at the edges of the larger sensor and maybe the reduced sensor size effectively crops out the bad stuff. ???

I am trying custom white balance settings for green grass/foliage in-camera, but the normal reddish output (pre-post editing) images all appear mostly black and white with no red at all. Odd. The custom white balance is what LifePixel suggests doing before shooting keepers, but their image examples are still mostly red and white with the normal IR filters. My next steps are to use different post processing methods to wrangle some useful images from test shots. Going to try some red and blue channel swapping on an old Windows machine and Paint Shop Pro (since DPP can't do that).

Other Thoughts...

I'm becoming concerned that my initial course was to have LP (LifePixel) make the camera manually focus solely on the back LCD for shooting. This takes time to set up (if only in the hand and not tripod), check camera settings, go to LiveView mode, compose, take a shot, go out of LiveView, review the shot, and retake if not satisfied with the result. This all takes a million times longer than just looking through the viewfinder, composing, autofocusing and hitting the shutter button. Then I'd of course chimp the result like always - we all do it.

I realize LiveView would be very bright with the converted camera and the process much easier than trying to see an image in LV with a front lens filter, but still. Much quicker the traditional SLR way. This means I'd probably have to send in both one lens (the 10-22) and the body in to be adjusted together for viewfinder focus (and eliminating the LV focus option). This is limiting because I would be confined to that single lens for shooting all my IR's. But it would make for simpler and faster shooting in the field. Still I was hoping for a multiple lens capability. Might not happen. I'm going to have to talk with them on the phone again.

pathfinder · July 30, 2014

I would be reluctant to give up autofocus, David, it will be quite handicapping as you noted.

Unless your desire is solely for a large format camera style of handling.

AF should work pretty well once set up properly. Mirrorless cameras seem to fare better with AF in IR, as discussed on the LifePixel site.

David_S85 · August 5, 2014

pathfinder wrote: »

I would be reluctant to give up autofocus, David, it will be quite handicapping as you noted.

Unless your desire is solely for a large format camera style of handling.

AF should work pretty well once set up properly. Mirrorless cameras seem to fare better with AF in IR, as discussed on the LifePixel site.

Luckily, the SL1 also has something called "tap LCD screen focus shutter," or somesuch - which does exactly that. I doesn't work reliably with an infrared lens filter in place since the live LCD image is so dark (hybrid autofocus in these now), but it seems to work well enough that I'm not concerned that I'll knock the focus out by the extra camera movement while doing so. There's a very slight delay after focus tap. What I'm more concerned about is that shooting by LCD manual or tap autofocus is that I will lose the ability to perform both mirror lockup and exposure bracketed shots (bracketed being even more important in infrared).

So I am torn by the focusing method choices. I should have sent in the cam a week ago but haven't yet. I need to pour over the pros/cons again in more depth.

Meanwhile, the new little cam is quite fun to use - yet slower to check settings (no top LCD) before firing off a shot than a more professional dSLR like what I've been used to. Slung it over my back while mini golfing the other night and really didn't even feel its weight on me (the shorty forty was on it). Yet, the SL1 is still quicker and more intuitive to use than our S95 micro camera since the shot is gone before that one is even powered up and configured to use.

David_S85 · August 7, 2014

More tests today to understand all the LCD screen focus point and shoot options. They are vast. There's something like 30 pages in the manual alone just dealing with stills photo composition and point and click shooting. Many modes to choose from. I can see why smart phones are taking over all the photography on the planet. Soooo simple compared to even a bottom line camera like this - which really -- should be simple and it is not.

David_S85 · August 10, 2014

Took the SL1 out on walkabouts yesterday afternoon with a 400 5.6 attached (remember when I said above that this should never be done?). It was more a case of the SL1 was an accessory to the 400 and it was attached to the lens. I honestly couldn't tell by carrying the lens in my hand that a camera body was attached to one end. That was an unexpected bonus I had not even considered; new portability (if you could call carrying a 400 portable) of a realistic 560mm lightweight high quality system.

SL1, ISO 1600, 1/1600, f/8, Canon 400 5.6 lens, handheld

SL1, ISO 3200, 1/640, f/5.6, Canon 400 5.6 lens, handheld

Not great light, subjects or images - just pics taken on a walk. Camera stability was questionable as there is little mass to dampen shutter and mirror slaps. Going to either silent shutter or mirror lockup helps but can slow shooting down. The grip, while admirable for a baby cam, helps little in stabilizing a setup such as this (with any lens, really). The gain was hand held hiking doesn't tire out the arm a bit. I don't like using a neck strap and didn't have any hand or neck strap with me.

pathfinder · August 10, 2014

David_S85 wrote: »

...........(bracketed being even more important in infrared).

This comment intrigued me a bit David, would you care to expand on this issue a bit?

I have not been aware of exposure bracketing used in IR, I may have to look into that.

David_S85 · August 10, 2014

pathfinder wrote: »

This comment intrigued me a bit David, would you care to expand on this issue a bit?
I have not been aware of exposure bracketing used in IR, I may have to look into that.

You may have thought I was going for HDR-like bracketing. I wasn't.

Many cams, post conversion, need EV's at +0.7 to +1.3 or so. Changing light conditions make proper exposure even more unreliable. Since what's on the LCD when chimping is less than informative due to the nature of what IR images in cam look like before proper conversion in post, I think it prudent to make a few shots at different exposures to just get it right. Of course, once I know the cam a bit better, that might not be necessary. Still, never a bad idea to bracket when doing important shooting, IR or conventional.

David_S85 · August 10, 2014

Live view shooting is the way to go in my case, bright outdoor light or not. That in mind, I just cooked up a proof of concept LCD hood design that I plan to construct out of… something. I've looked at the commercial Chinese-made fold up hoods on Amazon and eBay in the $12-18 range. Not bad, but they all seem to come with a built-in screen cover that would make the touch screen on the SL1 worthless - and the fact that none are made for the SL1 yet.

Ver. 0.002. Paper and tape for now. Will be black and made of… something. The tab on the bottom will slip into and out of a metal or plastic bracket that would be screwed into the tripod mount at the bottom of the body. The two little tips at the top will gently slip behind the eyecup where there is a void at both ends. The idea is that it would go on and off in about a second.

David_S85 · January 21, 2015

Update:

I've had fun with the diminutive SL1 for a half year as a normal camera. LifePixel just had their annual 20% off sale this past week, so I finally sent the camera out for the conversion. Despite having some much better gear, it was rather difficult to part with the little guy. Hopefully, I'll have just as much use and fun with the converted camera this spring when the green finally pushes winter aside. I had the standard conversion done, despite the more interesting choices they offer. We'll see where that gets me in post-processing. I don't yet know what lens I'll be using, so I had them do their universal focusing thing for the live view. I'd love to pick up a slightly used or refurbed 24mm pancake lens when they're available so I can carry a super lightweight IR alternative to accompany me on photo adventures. Otherwise, the old 10-22 will probably work OK too. More fun to come. Might be a few months before I post anything IR worthy.

ziggy53 · January 21, 2015

Wonderful news, David. The Canon EF 17-40mm, f4L USM makes a great IR standard zoom for Canon crop APS-C IR converted bodies. No IR hotspot and not too heavy.

http://www.lifepixel.com/lens-considerations

http://www.lensplay.com/lenses/lens_infra_red_IR.html

pathfinder · January 21, 2015

I second the EOS 17-40 f4 L for IR.

I used it on a converted 40D for a few years, and it worked quite nicely without any hot spots. The 17-40 is inexpensive for an L lens, nice and sharp, and not to heavy, like Ziggy said!

David_S85 · January 21, 2015

But… I don't have a 17-40 L. :cry

Brett1000 · January 27, 2015

David_S85 wrote: »

J

Here's one from last summer with a Hoya filter on the the 40mm pancake. I've had luck with that method in the past, but for some reason the 40mm pancake and the filter create nasty weird blooming near all the edges even though the rest is perfectly in focus. I used live view zoomed in to focus the below shot. That, and the 90 second exposure times just make filters an unpleasant shooting experience.

]

a filter (physical or PS software) seems much easier for IR type pics than buying a camera and altering it for that purpose

David_S85 · January 27, 2015

Brett1000 wrote: »

a filter (physical or PS software) seems much easier for IR type pics than buying a camera and altering it for that purpose

And it is simpler, also a fraction of the cost too -- until you get up into high quality 77mm and larger filters. But the problem with filters of this type is that light transmission is cut by ~97%, which translates to exposure times of 45 seconds to 2 minutes each. By then, wind and subject movement would render most scenes useless. Not exactly point and shoot anymore.

Conversions eliminate the hot mirror filter, which keeps the IR spectrum out of a normal camera's exposures, and at the same time adds an IR-only filter to keep the normal white light spectrum out. As a result, exposure times are similar to our normal cams. A scene that might take 1/320 second also requires the same 1/320 for an IR shot in a converted camera. This means that almost any subject at any time can be done in IR. This is why I chose a very small dSLR to use for this. If I can add the 24mm pancake, I can then carry this with me on photo expeditions without much hassle.

Here are some galleries of experienced IR users with examples from various filter conversion types. Photoshopping can't always give you results like these.
http://www.lifepixel.com/galleries/infrared-photography-gallery

Brett1000 · January 28, 2015

David_S85 wrote: »

And it is simpler, also a fraction of the cost too -- until you get up into high quality 77mm and larger filters. But the problem with filters of this type is that light transmission is cut by ~97%, which translates to exposure times of 45 seconds to 2 minutes each. By then, wind and subject movement would render most scenes useless. Not exactly point and shoot anymore.

Conversions eliminate the hot mirror filter, which keeps the IR spectrum out of a normal camera's exposures, and at the same time adds an IR-only filter to keep the normal white light spectrum out. As a result, exposure times are similar to our normal cams. A scene that might take 1/320 second also requires the same 1/320 for an IR shot in a converted camera. This means that almost any subject at any time can be done in IR. This is why I chose a very small dSLR to use for this. If I can add the 24mm pancake, I can then carry this with me on photo expeditions without much hassle.

Here are some galleries of experienced IR users with examples from various filter conversion types. Photoshopping can't always give you results like these.
http://www.lifepixel.com/galleries/infrared-photography-gallery

didn't know that about the physical filters and you're right using a photoshop IR filter is not quite the same (but within my budget)

David_S85 · January 28, 2015

Brett1000 wrote: »

didn't know that about the physical filters and you're right using a photoshop IR filter is not quite the same (but within my budget)

If you use Smugmug, there's even a PicMonkey IR setting that does a halfway decent job of almost somewhat coming nearly close to what IR might look like.

And it's free.

David_S85 · February 3, 2015

Well, now I've gotten myself into a big heap of trouble! :help As my converted SL1 is progressing on it's journey back to home base, I just happened to, um, and quite accidentally, notice another Canon Direct refurbished sale going on. This time a refurb SL1 (black or white) WITH an EF-s 18-55 IS STM lens is just $359. Mind you, the SL1 body I bought recently in post #1 was that same price. Now this. So I ordered a second black SL1 plus that lens just moments ago.

If I had to do this over again (from last year), I would have bought the two together, a white body being the IR cam, and the black as the standard cam. I'm going to have to mark the IR cam somehow as to not get the two confused. This second SL1 will become my backup (behind my full frame cam), if a co-worker buys my aged 40D and Tamron 28-75.

I've been wanting a small conventional cam for a while mostly as a vacation/light-duty camera. My wife has an older Canon S95 and loves it, and I thought I'd be going that direction too with a G7X class, but this price was hard to pass up and at half the G7X's cost. The flexibility it gives, besides a very compact walk around lens and body, is the second battery and charger. These smaller cams will all swallow a battery before breakfast making a second battery a must-have. So I'll be able to swap and borrow between them. The 18-55 should be usable on the IR body if needed.

I'm either real stupid :crazy or real smart by doing this.

Guess I'll need another pair of cards and a lens hood (doesn't come with one :cry) and a 58mm polarizer if I don't already have one laying around. B&H is next for those.

ziggy53 · February 3, 2015

David_S85 wrote: »

Well, now I've gotten myself into a big heap of trouble! :help As my converted SL1 is progressing on it's journey back to home base, I just happened to, um, and quite accidentally, notice another Canon Direct refurbished sale going on. This time a refurb SL1 (black or white) WITH an EF-s 18-55 IS STM lens is just $359. Mind you, the SL1 body I bought recently in post #1 was that same price. Now this. So I ordered a second black SL1 plus that lens just moments ago.

...

I think it's a great idea; having a small, capable, travel camera, which uses all of your current lenses plus adds a new lens (the EF-S 18-55mm, f/3.5-5.6 IS STM). This will also allow some new Live View and Video properties to explore, quite different from the 5D MKIII.

David_S85 · February 3, 2015

In fact, live view is the only way to use the IR modded SL1 now. I still find the viewfinder a more natural method of composing, focusing and shooting, and I'll only be using the finder in the un-modded copy. There are several options in LV, however, for focusing on subjects. I don't find the LCD screen finger moving and tap method as good. The camera is so light that it moves around considerably when one does that. Some other LV methods are marginally convenient, but bright outdoor light makes all options slower and somewhat a challenge. I'll have to live with that in the IR cam though. That, and finish building a foldable LCD hood.

I could have had the cam's focus matched to a single lens and still use the finder, but that can be limiting.

One thing I know will probably happen is an SL2 will be announced as both of these arrive.

David_S85 · February 5, 2015

Replacement SL1 battery is charging. Boy, this 18-55 IS STM lens is just as teeny tiny (and lightweight) as the SL1 is. Was 5 degrees F out when it arrived so I'm giving the wrapped hardware a few more hours to warm up... slowly. FedEx tossed it onto the porch with a big thud like it was the Sunday paper. Thanks FedEx. Good job. Wish I had a recorded webcam view of that happening.

I delayed the IR cam's delivery into next week for two reasons 1) they need a sig. and I'll be at work 2) after seeing what the FedEx driver did to my other one, I opted to pick it up myself at their local facility myself.

JC · February 5, 2015

I converted a refurbished OM-D E-m5 to full spectrum, slowly working through my stable of lenses to see which ones have hot spots and which don't (using different lens end filters, hot spots are strongly wavelength dependent, didn't expect that within the IR range). the UV-IR cut filter works pretty good to yield standard images. Haven't gotten the right filter combination yet to shoot UV.

I'm having fun

It's a great camera for IR work.

David_S85 · February 6, 2015

Great having you in this thread! I just responded to your posting of those two IR images.

Those lens issues with IR are something to consider, aren't they? There are lists out there that supposedly report which are good and bad lenses for IR converted cameras. Mostly for Nikon and Canon, though, so that might be tough finding a comprehensive list for Oly's.

I'm hoping to have fun with this converted camera IR stuff also. Shooting with the filters, quite frankly, sucked.

Just cloned my settings for my conventional SL1 matching the IR SL1 which is sitting in a local warehouse for me to pick up.

JC · February 6, 2015

David_S85 wrote: »

Great having you in this thread! I just responded to your posting of those two IR images.

Those lens issues with IR are something to consider, aren't they? There are lists out there that supposedly report which are good and bad lenses for IR converted cameras. Mostly for Nikon and Canon, though, so that might be tough finding a comprehensive list for Oly's.

I'm hoping to have fun with this converted camera IR stuff also. Shooting with the filters, quite frankly, sucked.

Just cloned my settings for my conventional SL1 matching the IR SL1 which is sitting in a local warehouse for me to pick up.

Thanks.

I used to have a standard rebel, an IR rebel, and my 5D, but got rid of all my rebel gear and crop lenses. I kept thinking that Canon would come out with a decent mirrorless that I could use for IR with sensor based focusing, etc, but the EOS M was a big disappointment, and I just couldn't buy into that system. Then I carried the 5D and lenses up to the top of Mt. Whitney (from the backside!) and decided to jump ship (or at least straddle the stream) after that.

For IR, E-m5 is great. I bought a refurbished deal a while ago, and was waiting for both Lifepixel to add the IBIS cameras to their list, and for their sale. I had it converted to full spectrum, and right now I just have the interferometric UV-IR cut filter for using it for standard scenes, and two filters, one in the 700nm range for false color and one in the 900 nm range for high contrast B&W. If there isn't a lot of vegetation in the scene, just doing a custom white balance makes even a filterless image look fairly 'standard'.

Custom white balance in the E-M5 works really well, in any given scene I can create two, one on vegetation for the IR filter and one on a white card (or rock) for a standard or full spectrum scene, and switch back and forth easily. The in-camera processing for the previews then look really good.

Focusing seems good, but I haven't done any static tests. Right now I just have 52mm filters because that matches the kit lens I have, and a couple of my wide to normal FD lenses. No-one local has the 52mm filter to 49mm lens jump up rings, and my order to Adorama was stalled by the non-snowpocalypse so I had to cancel it before I left on my last trip. Once I get those, I can use a bunch of my wide to normal OM lenses as well. The baby filters aren't too expensive.

Took my IR mod with landscape lenses and regular OM-D with telephoto lens on a horrendous 8.5 km slog through post monsoon mud out to somewhere you should be able to drive to absent the mud, and was able to carry both without feeling i it a burden, plus, didn't have to change lenses, which is a bit of an issue with the OM-D since the default setting is shutter open, so taking off the lens exposes the sensor.

Just a crop of one the shots with the 900nm filter. 1/200 seconds ISO 250

Not pollution, just steam from a geothermal power plant and mud volcanoes.