In order to better track the changing list of recommended lenses, I've added the complete list of lenses addressed in this video, as well as changes from these comments, to this article. Check this out for the latest information: blog.robsheaphotography.com/2020/08/17/fuji-x-mount-lenses-for-infrared.html
Have converted my X-T10 and own a couple 7artisans lenses (25mm and 55mm) and also an adapted Helios 58mm that are not on the list. If you'd like me to provide photos with these lenses to help with the research let me know how the images should be taken, happy to help! 🙌
@@GusPotenza That would be great! Find a subject in direct sunlight, such as a gray card, clean pavement, or clean sidewalk, free from visual distractions. Shoot with a 720 nm or 830 nm filter at each whole f-stop number and determine if any hot spots are visible. If so, they tend to be faint at low f-stops and more intense at higher f-stops. You are welcome to send me the info or the files. If you send the files, be sure to update the exif data to show the f-stop or rename them with the f-stop in the file name. 590.red/share
@@robshea great! My X-T10 was converted to 720nm so I just wanted to confirm that I don't need a filter, is that correct? It's been a bit rainy here in Perth, Western Australia, but I'll do it once we have a sunny weekend and I'll send you the files. I can probably compare with some of the listed lenses I have on the Good and Bad hotspot's columns but I'm no expert so I rather send you the files 🙏 I'm trying to determine which lens I'm going to use to decide on filter thread so this will help me. Thanks mate, will be in touch! Cheers
@@robshea can't see my reply from yesterday here. Files have been uploaded. The non-renamed files are from XF18-55mmF2.8-4 as you can see in the exif data to provide comparison with something you have in your database.
Based on images that I've seen, I'm removing the _XF 16-80mm f/4 R OIS WR_ from my recommended list and calling it Mixed. In some conditions, the lens produces a broad and dim hot spot, similar to the _XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR_. Based on feedback from viewers who have had great results, I'm upgrading both the _XC 15-45 f.3.5-5.6 OIS PZ_ and _XC 50-230mm f/4-6.7 OIS II_ from No to Mixed. They may work perfectly with some IR filters and poorly with others.
Thanks for the video. I normally do not use zoom lenses for infrared. However, based on your video, I will try the Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 with my 72mm Green.L IR720 infrared filter.
HI Rob, thanks for your nice video and list. i have an X-E3 that i modified to full spectrum (no filter/glass added) and i tested some lenses at full spectrum, 580 (B+W 090) and 830nm (B+W 093) 1) Fuji 23 f1,4 is wonderfull with the filters and every aperture setting but on FS (full spectrum) at f 1,4 is not so good, it needs to be stopped down to f4-5,6 to be sharp again, lens is foggy at wider apertures. 2) Rockstar 10mm f8 - focus need to be recalibrate (that means recalibrate the lens, pretty easy just rotate the back of the lens), works OK on FS, pretty nice at 830nm with some texture (Camera Raw) or structure (Capture one express) added 3) Meike 6.5 f2 - focus need to be recalibrate (you need to unscrew 4 screws on the focus ring and rotate it), acceptable on FS, nice on 580nm (i custom made a red filter back mount, using Neewer red gelatin for lights) I also tried some old lenses as Super Takumar 50 f1,4 M42 (Thorium version and normal), Zeiss Tessar 50 f2,8 M42 and Meyer Gorlitz Domiplan 50mm f/2.8 but i have to redo the tests since light was really bad that day. Oh i mostly forgot, Leica 180 f2.8 APO R, wonderful lens from FS to 830nm, so perfect that you hardly notice the full spectrum.
Thanks for the detailed breakdown! I'm curious about the Rockstar. I might have to give that a try. Treasure that Leica, I can't find it for sale online anywhere. I'm thinking about building a test rig to test lenses for hot spots in a controlled setting.
I also find my copy of the 8-16mm useful for IR (after using it accidentally for an afternoon). I find no hot spots up to and including f11. After f11 there is usually hot spots but they are diffuse and I can usually correct for them, unlike for example the 56mm f1.2 Mk1. I also had an exposure at f22 with no hot spots. I use a 560nm X-T2 though the lens may be more prone to hot spots with higher nm conversions.
Could you send me some test shots of the 8-16mm at various f-stops? It would be good to see examples since your results vary from other reports. Thanks! 590.red/share
Can add that the Venus Optics Laowa 65 mm f/2.8 2x macro, which is a fully manual lens has excellent IR performance in terms of hot spots. It is also a very sharp lens, that can focus at any distance from 2x macro to infinity.
Rob - I tried a few shots with my XF 200 f/2 mounted on my X-T10 (converted with an 850 nm filter on the sensor) - experienced mild hot spots at f/5.6 and strong hot spots at f/11.
Awesome (& thorough) review! Thanks so much. I just got start in IR - Fujifilm X-T3 converted to 590nm by LifePixel. My standard landscape kit had the 14mmF2.8, XF16-55mmF2.8 and the XF50-140mmF2.8 - and (as you note) these all work well for IR (w/ the caveat for the 16-55 needing to be at f/8 or wider). Personlly, I just love the 14mmF2.8 - I tend to “see” the14mm & 16mm focal lengths - and at 16mm & f/5.6 there is a lot of depth of field (thankfully ;-) ). I do have the Laowa 9mm - Astro work - hadn’t thought about IR - will have to try that out! Similarly, I have the Samyang fisheye - will try that out as well! Thanks again for the detailed review!
Fujifilm X-T20 850nm IR converted lens that works with no or very weak hotspots (not already reported): Venus Optics Laowa 10 CF 4 (pancake): up to f5.6 no hotspot, from f8 and up, very weak hotspot but bad diffraction; overall IQ good at center, bad at corners (smearing) Meike 50 f0.95: no hotspots, soft at full aperture, but very good IQ at 5.6-8 (my copy is very sharp); my favorite lens with the XF23f1.4 Tamron 90 f2.8 SP Di Macro VC USB (model F017) for Canon EF adapter with Andoer EF-FX: wonderful lens, hotspots only when stopping down over f16 (but diffraction kick in before at f8)
I just got the 15-45mm and tested it out at f8 and have no hotspot on my X-T20 590nm at 15mm or 45mm. IQ at 15mm is pretty decent (corners are somewhat soft but center is quite sharp). My GAS yearns for the 14mm f2.8 prime though!
I also use the 15-45mm and it works absolutely perfect! I have a 720nm converted X-E2, maybe the filter/ conversion makes a difference! I have also tried the 18-55 and 27mm, with my body both are absolutely unusable. The Canon 50mm stm via Viltrox adapter also produces nice Images....
I have to give another vote for the 15-45, as much as I don't like PZ lenses I bought it specifically for infrared as it showed no hotspots. I've had some luck with the 18-55 although you have to find specific focal lengths at specific apatures (in reality it's not usable but is possible to get a good shot with lots of trial and error - despite that, I really wouldn't recommend it). I have a 10-24 that I use for IR and it is quit good, it does produce a lot of flair when shooting into the sun, but no hotspots (I might be lucky with that example). The 14mm f2.8 and 35mm f1.4 are winners too.
I use an XC 15-45mm with an X-T100 converted to 590nm and have not seen any obvious hot spots. I have also used an XC 50-230mm with the same camera and have not noticed any hot spot issues.
@@robshea Are hot spots influenced by the cut off frequency? Before having my camera converted to 590nm, I read a couple of posts about people having problems with those lenses; however, I think they were using cameras configured for 720nm or 850nm.
@@sshapiro63 I suspect that is one of the challenges with the resources available. It's not always clear which cut-offs were tested. It would be great to have a more comprehensive database that detailed the cut-offs tested.
Hi Rob, tested a new Samyang 12 AF f2 ultrawide lens with an Hoya R72 IR filter... Cannot be at all recommended. Hot spots and halos to be seen on the taken picture. What a pity! 😓 62mm filter size by the way... 😉
@@robshea I mainly tested this lens at f5.6 and f8 and the results were totally unacceptable. They were so bad that I assume that in bigger apertures they would remain not even to be considered for IR photography. This next thursday I'm going to receive a new Viltrox 13mm f1.4. Will test it with my Hoya R72 filter, this time in all apertures and will let you know. The Samyang AF 12 f2 was a big disappointment for me to be honest... Basically the same optics with no further improvement from the manual version than the AF, not really needed for IR or night photography. Let's see how the Viltrox performs... Read/Watched reviews are quite impressive!
Rob, I have found this video incredibly helpful, thank you for the time and effort you have put into it. I had a wonderful period of IR photography years ago with my Rollei 6008 camera and Konica IR film. Regrettably all part of the past. I am now a very happy Fuji X user and last year started to dabble in IR. I took a long trip into quite wild and rocky bush country here in Australia and used the 10-24mm, it seems now that it was the very worst choice, and spent hours removing very obvious hot spots from well composed and exposed images. I had not explored the www in any depth so did not stumble on your advice. I have the 16-80mm, the 14mm, and 23mm and all the telephotos so with your advice should be able to succeed. I will have to find what you say about white balance settings and processing of RAW in LR which is no doubts somewhere on the www. You will hear from me again. Regards Robin
Robin, that sounds like a bummer with the 10-24mm. It's such a great lens for landscapes, too bad it doesn't work for IR. I would point you to my video on hot spot removal, but you are probably more of an expert at this point. I do most of my IR shooting with the 14mm and 23mm, which are both great. I am slightly opinionated on white balance, having covered it in a couple of videos. th-cam.com/video/QUFitdP7uoc/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/iaFe66cSb2o/w-d-xo.html Thanks for your feedback!
Also one new cool lens that I would be interested to buy and know if it works with IR (probably no reports yet) is "Laowa Argus 33mm f/0.95 APO". Or do apochromatic lenses ever work with Infrared? :O
No reposts on that specific lens yet. One of the benefits of apochromatic lenses is that the focus difference between visible light and infrared is less dramatic compared to non-apochromatic lenses. This doesn't impact mirrorless cameras or DSLR live-view but could be really helpful if you are using a DSLR and wish to focus through the viewfinder.
@@robshea Actually it acts the same as the Samyamg AF 24mm F2.8 on the Sony Emount. its a diffused gigantic circle. Can see it on Edward Nobles lens report
Xt2 converted by lifepixels f23;35;50 are my main lens plus i have lens baby 56, 85. I will try out my 100-400 Never thought about it for. iR 720nm. I tasted my 18-55 and not good so I assumed (apparently incorrectly) all Fuji zooms were a no go. Thanks to you I may found new uses for my 55-200 and 100-400 plus an excuse to convince my bride to get 16-80 for Christmas present.
Rob, have you had a chance to try the newer fuji 33mm f1.4 for infrared? Or anyone else out there has that has used this lens for infrared and can give some feedback much appreciated. Curious to know!
Fujinon XF 18mm F1.4 R LM WR is expected to be launched in May, 2021. I really hope it would work well with infrared photography! Will you confirm that after release? Super helpful thanks! :)
Thank you very much for this extremely useful Information! This helped me a lot in choosing the lenses for my newly acquired X-T2. Glad that I already have the 23 f2. :) Provided the XC 35mm has the same optical design as the XF 35mm f2 (some sources say so), I suppose it's also a good lens for infrared then
Hey Rob. Thanks for the great information. My X-M1 is out for a 720 conversion and I want to test my lenses. I have read that some people have found the 18-55 is safe, but only wide open. Also the 27mm and 60mm f2.4 are reported to be safe, but only wide open. What subject is best to shoot in order to confirm a hotspot? Thanks again for the help.
If you are limited to only shooting wide open, that would severely limit DOF, increase softness, and use cases where the lens is worthwhile. I have tested the hot spots on the 18-55mm and I would say that it is not suitable for IR. The 60mm is terrible in IR; I used it to show what bad hot spots look like. The 27mm is not good either. For testing hot spots, I would recommend shooting large tree trunks or pavement, something with a uniform brightness and texture.
Your videos and website has been very helpful. I would like to comment on the suitability of the Fuji 16-80 lens. I bought one when they first came out (2 or more years ago?) and was disappointed to find faint hotspots as your hotspot table points out. I continued using my 18-135 until earlier this year whenI started using the 16-80 and, voila, no hotspots. Why is that? No Idea but it must be something to do with the aging of the coating inside the lens. I have using since March 2022 without a single hotspot.
Here are the lenses I use for infrared photography: Fuji X-Pro with 23mm f/1.4 Fujinon lens and 62mm Zomei infrared filter (950nm) Fuji X-Pro with 23mm f/1.4 Fujinon lens and 62mm Hoya R72 infrared filter (720nm) Fuji X-Pro with 16mm Fujinon lens and 72mm Green.L IR720 infrared filter with 67-72mm step up ring Fuji X-Pro with 12mm f/2.8 Zeiss Touit lens and 72mm Green.L IR720 infrared filter with 67-72mm step up ring. No hot spots from f/2.8 open through f/8, but very subtle hot spot at f/11. Fuji X-Pro with 52mm Hoya R72 infrared filter (720nm) and ... adapted 28mm f/3.5 Nikon lens (52mm filter thread) adapted 28mm f/2.8 Nikon lens (52mm filter thread) adapted 35mm f/2 Nikon lens (52mm filter thread)
Here is my current list of GF lenses based on research, no first hand experience yet. Prime GF 23mm f/4 R LM WR (hot spots) GF 45mm f/2.8 R WR (good IR) 62mm filter GF 50mm f/3.5 R LM WR (unknown) GF 63mm f/2.8 R WR (hot spots) GF 110mm f/2 R LM WR (unknown) GF 120mm f/4 Macro R LM OIS WR (good IR) GF 250mm f/4 R LM OIS WR (good IR) GF 250mm f/4 R LM OIS WR + 1.4x extender (unknown) Zoom GF 32-64mm f/4 R LM WR (hot spots) GF 45-100mm f/4 R LM OIS WR (good IR) GF 100-200mm f/5.6 R LM OIS (good IR)
I have a 50R converted to full spectrum. In my experience, using filters, the best performing lens is the 45mm and I've had excellent results with the 45-100mm & 100-200mm. Of the lenses below I do not have the 120mm, but the list is pretty accurate.
Aside from the obvious focus length differences, have you noticed any major differences between the 16-80 and the 18-135mm? I've been thinking about pairing one of these with a full-spectrum body and building a collection of filters with a single thread size.
@@robshea As far as IR goes they both seem to work well, in the sense that they do not give hot spots. I got the 16-80 mm recently with an X-T4, assuming that it would be of a better optical quality than the 18-135, but I haven't gotten around to testing that assumption. Unfoutunately the 16-80 mm gets pretty soft as one approaches 80 mm, so at the moment I'm not too sure that it is actually bettter than 18-135. When thinking about full spectrum and a single collection of filters, have you considered clip-in filters? I understand that STC have a set of IR clip-in filters (last option on drop-down list) at shop.stcoptics.com/product/clipfilter_fujifilm/ .
@@kbqvist Good to know. I haven't found any image quality tests for the 16-80mm online. Those filters look interesting. They support a limited number of lenses, including the 18-135mm.
I have them listed here. Generally speaking, most find them good enough for IR, although you may notice hot spots with narrower apertures. blog.robsheaphotography.com/2020/08/17/fuji-x-mount-lenses-for-infrared.html#compact
Hi Rob, thanks for your interesting and informative you tube videos on IR. Do you know how the 8mm-16mm wide zoom works like on a XE1 converted cameras?
Excellent video - I am interested in trying IR photography and have a Fuji X-T3 and S-X10. Neither have been converted and I just want to start off by buying the Hoya R72 IR filter to see if I like it. I have the Fujinon 16-80 that you say is compatible, but is it compatible just with a modified camera or will it give the same results using the Hoya filter? Thank you
Compatible lenses should work with both converted and unconverted cameras. X-T3 should be fine. I did some testing with an unconverted X-S10 and got some odd results. You can see in this video: th-cam.com/video/OwFDbiVdoEc/w-d-xo.html
@@robshea Thank you, I have since watched your video on the Hoya vs Kase filters and I feel the Hoya should be a decent filter to try....so will be indulging very soon!!!
Hi Rob! Thank you for your comprehensive videos about infrared. It inspired me to pick up a Hoya R72 for my Fuji xf 23mm f2 and 35mm f2. All the resources online I’ve found so far say these lenses work great for infrared so I was super excited that I happened to have that gear ready to try out. However now that I have the filter I’ve noticed some artifacts that are particularly noticeable and distracting to the image. Both have a wide color vignette around their edges when shooting in color as well as two very noticeable hot spots on the left and right side of the frame. I see these at any aperture and in various conditions. Shooting in black and white helps me avoid noticing these artifacts too much but I’d enjoy trying more color infrared images. Any idea why both my copies of these two lenses aren’t producing good infrared images like I thought they would? Would it have anything to do with the angle I’m shooting in respect to sources of IR light? Maybe it is the adapter ring I use? I bought a 46mm filter and adapted it to the 43mm size of the lens. Or could it just be the case that I happened to pick up stinker copies of both these lenses? Any help or insight would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!
Are you using an X-S10? If so, then it's the camera, not the lenses. I noticed this on my X-S10 in this video: th-cam.com/video/OwFDbiVdoEc/w-d-xo.html If not, what camera are you using?
@@joeymatsumoto9177 Hmm, it could be the same issue as the X-S10. I doubt it is the lenses as I tried multiple different lenses on the X-S10 and saw the same result with each.
@@robshea Update: I busted out my old X-T20 to do some tests and I found an interesting result. My X-T3 is showing those nasty hot spots on either end of the frame (in landscape) and it’s pretty jarring… my X-T20 shows no hotspots of the sort. Furthermore, the exposure on my X-T3 is significantly darker than on my X-T20 at the same settings. I don’t really know how to calculate the exact difference in stops, but it sure is a noticeable difference in the shutter speeds to achieve similar looking exposure values. I matched every setting I could to get a good comparison and it’s a pretty clear effect. I wonder if my X-T3 has a problem with its sensor or maybe it just has a much heavier IR filter on it? I’m not sure but I don’t think the sensor has any trouble in the visible light spectrum… I guess the moral of the story is that the lenses aren’t the problem, my camera is. Sounds like a similar issue to your X-S10, but I’ve never thought the X-T3 would have the same issue. I guess from now on my X-T20 will be my IR camera until further notice.
@@joeymatsumoto9177 Thanks for testing and sharing those details! It certainly appears that the X-T3 and X-S10 both suffer from the same issue when unconverted. They likely have the same sensor, but I've seen no reports of either camera having issues once converted. This leads me to suspect that the hot mirror filter built into these cameras is the issue. This hot mirror would be removed during a conversion, so converted cameras would not have the issue. The X-T20 is a great camera, with only a slightly smaller sensor, so your image quality should be solid.
When testing a lens for hotspots, is there an ideal angle from the sun someone should shoot at? I do have the XF 70-300mm and will be testing it once I get my camera converted.
Bill recently shared an image using the XF 10-24mm, a typically bad rated lens for IR, with no hot spots. (instagram.com/p/CQr2Y5ErxJg/?) He said they had the sun to his back and was curious if that made a difference. Would be good to test. Looking forward to the results from the XF 70-300mm and wondering if it performs better than the XF 55-200mm in IR.
Hi Rob, thanks for your excellent work. Most of the resources mentioned show the 16mm f1.4 as good for IR. I'm also quite happy with it, using on a 590nm converted X-T100. Any ideas as to what causes the variability in results? Regards, Ward
There could be a few factors at play here. - Filter quality. Lower quality filters could produce worse results. This is one of the challenges with testing in IR, it's impossible to test every lens with every filter and declare a pass/fail. (This is one of the reasons that I like vintage lenses, as they perform dramatically better than modern lenses in regards to hot spots.) - Lens build quality could be a factor. For example, with the XF 14mm f/2.8, there was a report of concentric rings appearing in IR images for one person. Myself and others didn't see that in our copy. Yet, when I tested with some low-quality ND filters, the concentric rings appeared. Now, when I look at images shot with that lens, I'm seeing the faintest of these concentric rings even without the ND filter. I still think the XF 14mm is a great lens for IR, but it's not perfect. Maybe the XF 16mm f1.4 has a similar issue, where the hot spots appear for some filters, but not others, depending on the build quality. - The X-T100 uses a Bayer sensor instead of a X-Trans sensor; that could produce different results. Do you see good results at all apertures? Or do you see hot spots higher f-stop numbers?
probabaly lack of a lens hood or shooting into the sun. hot spots are due to inside of many lenses appearing reflective/silver instead of black under IR light. black aluminum that's often used to make lens barrels is actually transparent in IR so if you take a photo of the lens it appears silver, which obviously bounces light around in a bad way.
This is a great resource. Thanks for doing this. Did you use a converted camera to test these lenses? If so which camera(s) and which wavelength conversion(s)? Also did you evaluate sharpness or just hot spots? Sorry if you addressed this somewhere and I missed it. There is a dearth of good information out there on IR lens performance so I appreciate your extensive evaluation!
This includes lenses that I own and have tested on a 590nm-converted X-T20 camera. It also includes feedback from viewers and other reputable sources. There is a list of sources at the bottom of the blog article. The video will fall out of date over time, but I will strive to keep the blog updated. blog.robsheaphotography.com/2020/08/17/fuji-x-mount-lenses-for-infrared.html I didn't evaluate sharpness for this roundup. I do for all of the lenses that I have purchased. I have found these lenses to be very sharp: XF 14mm f/2.8, XF 23mm f/2, XF 50mm f.2, XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8, Samyang/Rokinon 8mm f/2.8, Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f/2.0. I have sold these lenses due to poor sharpness: XF 16mm f/2.8, XF 18mm f/2
Hi Rob, I’m thinking about purchasing a Fujifilm XT-3 converted body only. I normally shoot with Sony and Canon I’m on a tight budget I have no Fuji lenses which is the least expensive and produces the nicest infrared images another words best bang for the buck.
The XF 18-135mm is the best zoom option. If you want better image quality, I would recommend any of the Fujinon f/2 lenses: XF 23mm f/2 R WR, XF 35mm f/2 R WR, or 50mm f/2 R WR. You can find a complete list here: blog.robsheaphotography.com/infrared-lenses-fujifilm-x/
The 8-16mm f/2.8 lens is only good for IR wide open. I would recommend Fujifilm XF primes, such as the 14mm. I have not yet tested the Fujifilm XF 18mm f/1.4.
There is no perfect X100 lens for IR (I believe that the first four models all use the same lens.) But you can get good results with lower f-stops. I've linked to some galleries of those how have used these cameras for IR. blog.robsheaphotography.com/infrared-lenses-fujifilm-x/#compact-cameras-with-prime-lenses
@@benjones8977 Sounds like the Thomas Heaton video. He converted directly to a 720 nm filter. You can convert to a specific filter or you can convert to full spectrum. A full spectrum conversion allows you to use a variety of external filters, infrared high-pass (550, 590, 720, 830, etc.), multiband (IR Chrome), and even Ultraviolet.
I have a full spectrum Fuji XT-1. Do I have to use a visible light band filter in order to shoot standard (visible light) photography, or do I get away with just taking off the IR filter and shooting normally? @ Rob Shea
In order to shoot visible light only on a full spectrum camera, you will need to use an external hot mirror filter. The hot mirror will block UV and IR light, only allowing visible light to pass to the sensor.
I just bought 7Artisans 60mm f/2.8 Macro MKII and used it with a Hoya 720nm filter - there's no hotspot at all, to my eyes. Is there anything like a safe testing procedure?
Select a flat subject in direct sunlight, such as pointing down to a section of sidewalk or road. Take a shot at each full stop aperture, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, etc. Compare the images on your computer to look for differences. Shooting on a tripod will make is easier to compare the images.
@@robshea 7Artisans 60mm f2.8 Macro MKII is usable only up to f/5,6 - it's not practical to use it for macro IR photography, because macro photography requires much DOF, it can be done but it's not my cup of tea. You're positive that Venus Laowa 65mm f/2.8 2X Ultra Macro APO has no hotspot at all?
Whoops … I need to revise my comment after reading your reply to another comment about the 16-80. I probably will change my Christmas wish to the 14mm. :)
I am both happy and sad for this. Sad because I was planning to convert my X70 to IR and happy because you shared this before I did. Thanks for the update!
Just to confirm, what this a converted or unconverted X70? I'm seeing some reports that the X100 series cameras have worse hot spots in unconverted cameras, but little/no hot spots when converted.
In order to better track the changing list of recommended lenses, I've added the complete list of lenses addressed in this video, as well as changes from these comments, to this article. Check this out for the latest information: blog.robsheaphotography.com/2020/08/17/fuji-x-mount-lenses-for-infrared.html
Have converted my X-T10 and own a couple 7artisans lenses (25mm and 55mm) and also an adapted Helios 58mm that are not on the list.
If you'd like me to provide photos with these lenses to help with the research let me know how the images should be taken, happy to help! 🙌
@@GusPotenza That would be great! Find a subject in direct sunlight, such as a gray card, clean pavement, or clean sidewalk, free from visual distractions. Shoot with a 720 nm or 830 nm filter at each whole f-stop number and determine if any hot spots are visible. If so, they tend to be faint at low f-stops and more intense at higher f-stops. You are welcome to send me the info or the files. If you send the files, be sure to update the exif data to show the f-stop or rename them with the f-stop in the file name. 590.red/share
@@robshea great!
My X-T10 was converted to 720nm so I just wanted to confirm that I don't need a filter, is that correct?
It's been a bit rainy here in Perth, Western Australia, but I'll do it once we have a sunny weekend and I'll send you the files.
I can probably compare with some of the listed lenses I have on the Good and Bad hotspot's columns but I'm no expert so I rather send you the files 🙏
I'm trying to determine which lens I'm going to use to decide on filter thread so this will help me.
Thanks mate, will be in touch!
Cheers
@@GusPotenza Correct, with a 720 nm converted camera you do not need an external filter.
@@robshea can't see my reply from yesterday here.
Files have been uploaded. The non-renamed files are from XF18-55mmF2.8-4 as you can see in the exif data to provide comparison with something you have in your database.
Based on images that I've seen, I'm removing the _XF 16-80mm f/4 R OIS WR_ from my recommended list and calling it Mixed. In some conditions, the lens produces a broad and dim hot spot, similar to the _XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR_. Based on feedback from viewers who have had great results, I'm upgrading both the _XC 15-45 f.3.5-5.6 OIS PZ_ and _XC 50-230mm f/4-6.7 OIS II_ from No to Mixed. They may work perfectly with some IR filters and poorly with others.
I primarily use the Fuji 23 and 35 mm primes for IR
Thanks for the video.
I normally do not use zoom lenses for infrared. However, based on your video, I will try the Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 with my 72mm Green.L IR720 infrared filter.
Hi I have just got a camera converted now was going to use the 18-55 but now wont use it. I will now buy the 23mm f1.4 lens
HI Rob,
thanks for your nice video and list.
i have an X-E3 that i modified to full spectrum (no filter/glass added) and i tested some lenses at full spectrum, 580 (B+W 090) and 830nm (B+W 093)
1) Fuji 23 f1,4 is wonderfull with the filters and every aperture setting but on FS (full spectrum) at f 1,4 is not so good, it needs to be stopped down to f4-5,6 to be sharp again, lens is foggy at wider apertures.
2) Rockstar 10mm f8 - focus need to be recalibrate (that means recalibrate the lens, pretty easy just rotate the back of the lens), works OK on FS, pretty nice at 830nm with some texture (Camera Raw) or structure (Capture one express) added
3) Meike 6.5 f2 - focus need to be recalibrate (you need to unscrew 4 screws on the focus ring and rotate it), acceptable on FS, nice on 580nm (i custom made a red filter back mount, using Neewer red gelatin for lights)
I also tried some old lenses as Super Takumar 50 f1,4 M42 (Thorium version and normal), Zeiss Tessar 50 f2,8 M42 and Meyer Gorlitz Domiplan 50mm f/2.8 but i have to redo the tests since light was really bad that day.
Oh i mostly forgot, Leica 180 f2.8 APO R, wonderful lens from FS to 830nm, so perfect that you hardly notice the full spectrum.
Thanks for the detailed breakdown! I'm curious about the Rockstar. I might have to give that a try.
Treasure that Leica, I can't find it for sale online anywhere.
I'm thinking about building a test rig to test lenses for hot spots in a controlled setting.
@@robshea The hot spots test rig will be very usefull.
I have access to other Leica lenses, maybe one day i will test some.
Just tried the XF 80mm. Hot spots all through the aperture range.
Thanks! I've updated the blog with this report. blog.robsheaphotography.com/2020/08/17/fuji-x-mount-lenses-for-infrared.html
I also find my copy of the 8-16mm useful for IR (after using it accidentally for an afternoon). I find no hot spots up to and including f11. After f11 there is usually hot spots but they are diffuse and I can usually correct for them, unlike for example the 56mm f1.2 Mk1. I also had an exposure at f22 with no hot spots. I use a 560nm X-T2 though the lens may be more prone to hot spots with higher nm conversions.
Could you send me some test shots of the 8-16mm at various f-stops? It would be good to see examples since your results vary from other reports. Thanks! 590.red/share
Can add that the Venus Optics Laowa 65 mm f/2.8 2x macro, which is a fully manual lens has excellent IR performance in terms of hot spots. It is also a very sharp lens, that can focus at any distance from 2x macro to infinity.
Added to the list. Thanks! blog.robsheaphotography.com/2020/08/17/fuji-x-mount-lenses-for-infrared.html
Rob - I tried a few shots with my XF 200 f/2 mounted on my X-T10 (converted with an 850 nm filter on the sensor) - experienced mild hot spots at f/5.6 and strong hot spots at f/11.
Peter, thanks for sharing your results! I've updated the list on the web site.
Awesome (& thorough) review! Thanks so much. I just got start in IR - Fujifilm X-T3 converted to 590nm by LifePixel. My standard landscape kit had the 14mmF2.8, XF16-55mmF2.8 and the XF50-140mmF2.8 - and (as you note) these all work well for IR (w/ the caveat for the 16-55 needing to be at f/8 or wider). Personlly, I just love the 14mmF2.8 - I tend to “see” the14mm & 16mm focal lengths - and at 16mm & f/5.6 there is a lot of depth of field (thankfully ;-) ). I do have the Laowa 9mm - Astro work - hadn’t thought about IR - will have to try that out! Similarly, I have the Samyang fisheye - will try that out as well!
Thanks again for the detailed review!
Excellent, it sounds like you are all set to use your lenses for IR!
Really useful info. Thanks, Rob!
Fujifilm X-T20 850nm IR converted lens that works with no or very weak hotspots (not already reported):
Venus Optics Laowa 10 CF 4 (pancake): up to f5.6 no hotspot, from f8 and up, very weak hotspot but bad diffraction; overall IQ good at center, bad at corners (smearing)
Meike 50 f0.95: no hotspots, soft at full aperture, but very good IQ at 5.6-8 (my copy is very sharp); my favorite lens with the XF23f1.4
Tamron 90 f2.8 SP Di Macro VC USB (model F017) for Canon EF adapter with Andoer EF-FX: wonderful lens, hotspots only when stopping down over f16 (but diffraction kick in before at f8)
Added these to the web site. Thanks!
I just got the 15-45mm and tested it out at f8 and have no hotspot on my X-T20 590nm at 15mm or 45mm. IQ at 15mm is pretty decent (corners are somewhat soft but center is quite sharp). My GAS yearns for the 14mm f2.8 prime though!
Excellent, thanks for the update! I purchased my 14mm f/2.8 used, it's great and I saved some cash.
Tested today a Viltrox 33mm f1.4 with a Zomei 720nm IR filter into a Fujifilm X-T2... Works like a charm!! Can share images if needed.
Is this the v1 or v2 of the Viltrox AF 33mmf/1.4? I don't know if they are optically different, but I can specific which one works.
@@robshea V2, Rob. As far as I know, optically they're identical, having the V2 a different housing so that it doesn't clash with Fuji's X-Pro bodies.
The filter size is 52mm 👍. Congratulations for your work. A true reference into IR photography
@@inakilauzirika5076 DOH! The dreaded copy/paste error. 😬Thanks for catching that! 😀
I also use the 15-45mm and it works absolutely perfect! I have a 720nm converted X-E2, maybe the filter/ conversion makes a difference!
I have also tried the 18-55 and 27mm, with my body both are absolutely unusable. The Canon 50mm stm via Viltrox adapter also produces nice Images....
Another vote of confidence for the 15-45mm!
I have to give another vote for the 15-45, as much as I don't like PZ lenses I bought it specifically for infrared as it showed no hotspots. I've had some luck with the 18-55 although you have to find specific focal lengths at specific apatures (in reality it's not usable but is possible to get a good shot with lots of trial and error - despite that, I really wouldn't recommend it). I have a 10-24 that I use for IR and it is quit good, it does produce a lot of flair when shooting into the sun, but no hotspots (I might be lucky with that example). The 14mm f2.8 and 35mm f1.4 are winners too.
I use an XC 15-45mm with an X-T100 converted to 590nm and have not seen any obvious hot spots. I have also used an XC 50-230mm with the same camera and have not noticed any hot spot issues.
That's great that the 15-45mm and 50-230mm work without hot spots! That's a different result for those lenses than one of the sources I referenced.
@@robshea Are hot spots influenced by the cut off frequency? Before having my camera converted to 590nm, I read a couple of posts about people having problems with those lenses; however, I think they were using cameras configured for 720nm or 850nm.
@@sshapiro63 I suspect that is one of the challenges with the resources available. It's not always clear which cut-offs were tested. It would be great to have a more comprehensive database that detailed the cut-offs tested.
Hi Rob, tested a new Samyang 12 AF f2 ultrawide lens with an Hoya R72 IR filter... Cannot be at all recommended. Hot spots and halos to be seen on the taken picture. What a pity! 😓
62mm filter size by the way... 😉
Bummer! Thanks for the update; I added it to the page. Were there hot spots at all apertures?
@@robshea I mainly tested this lens at f5.6 and f8 and the results were totally unacceptable. They were so bad that I assume that in bigger apertures they would remain not even to be considered for IR photography.
This next thursday I'm going to receive a new Viltrox 13mm f1.4. Will test it with my Hoya R72 filter, this time in all apertures and will let you know.
The Samyang AF 12 f2 was a big disappointment for me to be honest... Basically the same optics with no further improvement from the manual version than the AF, not really needed for IR or night photography.
Let's see how the Viltrox performs... Read/Watched reviews are quite impressive!
@@inakilauzirika5076 Good deal. Thanks for the details!
@@inakilauzirika5076 How is the Viltrox performing in IR? I am also considering it.
Rob, I have found this video incredibly helpful, thank you for the time and effort you have put into it. I had a wonderful period of IR photography years ago with my Rollei 6008 camera and Konica IR film. Regrettably all part of the past. I am now a very happy Fuji X user and last year started to dabble in IR. I took a long trip into quite wild and rocky bush country here in Australia and used the 10-24mm, it seems now that it was the very worst choice, and spent hours removing very obvious hot spots from well composed and exposed images. I had not explored the www in any depth so did not stumble on your advice. I have the 16-80mm, the 14mm, and 23mm and all the telephotos so with your advice should be able to succeed. I will have to find what you say about white balance settings and processing of RAW in LR which is no doubts somewhere on the www. You will hear from me again.
Regards
Robin
Robin, that sounds like a bummer with the 10-24mm. It's such a great lens for landscapes, too bad it doesn't work for IR. I would point you to my video on hot spot removal, but you are probably more of an expert at this point. I do most of my IR shooting with the 14mm and 23mm, which are both great.
I am slightly opinionated on white balance, having covered it in a couple of videos.
th-cam.com/video/QUFitdP7uoc/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/iaFe66cSb2o/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for your feedback!
Also one new cool lens that I would be interested to buy and know if it works with IR (probably no reports yet) is "Laowa Argus 33mm f/0.95 APO". Or do apochromatic lenses ever work with Infrared? :O
No reposts on that specific lens yet. One of the benefits of apochromatic lenses is that the focus difference between visible light and infrared is less dramatic compared to non-apochromatic lenses. This doesn't impact mirrorless cameras or DSLR live-view but could be really helpful if you are using a DSLR and wish to focus through the viewfinder.
Got a X100V with Hoya R72. Gigantic hotspot
Huge bummer. I was thinking about converting one to a 830nm monochrome camera. Thanks for the report!
@@robshea Actually it acts the same as the Samyamg AF 24mm F2.8 on the Sony Emount. its a diffused gigantic circle. Can see it on Edward Nobles lens report
Xt2 converted by lifepixels f23;35;50 are my main lens plus i have lens baby 56, 85. I will try out my 100-400 Never thought about it for. iR 720nm. I tasted my 18-55 and not good so I assumed (apparently incorrectly) all Fuji zooms were a no go. Thanks to you I may found new uses for my 55-200 and 100-400 plus an excuse to convince my bride to get 16-80 for Christmas present.
The f/2 lenses are great for IR!
Rob, have you had a chance to try the newer fuji 33mm f1.4 for infrared? Or anyone else out there has that has used this lens for infrared and can give some feedback much appreciated. Curious to know!
Only hot spot free at good f/2 and wider.
Fujinon XF 18mm F1.4 R LM WR is expected to be launched in May, 2021. I really hope it would work well with infrared photography! Will you confirm that after release? Super helpful thanks! :)
I haven't yet decided if I will be picking up this lens, but I will keep my eyes on the sources for other who might.
i just bought a Yashica DsB 135mm f2.8 and tried with my converted xe1 and 720nm, no hotspot in all aperture. Hope it helps.
Thanks for sharing! Added to blog.
Hi Rob
viltrox 85mm f1.8 have a hot spot in almost all aperture
Added to the website, just to confirm, this is the "Viltrox AF 85mm f/1.8 XF II"?
@@robshea exactly
Thank you very much for this extremely useful Information! This helped me a lot in choosing the lenses for my newly acquired X-T2. Glad that I already have the 23 f2. :) Provided the XC 35mm has the same optical design as the XF 35mm f2 (some sources say so), I suppose it's also a good lens for infrared then
It would be great if the XC 35mm performed as well as the XF 35mm f/2. (corrected)
@@robshea you mean 35mm. Or did I miss an announcement from fuji for another XC Prime?
@@kornasteniker3939 Yes, I meant 35mm.
Hey Rob. Thanks for the great information. My X-M1 is out for a 720 conversion and I want to test my lenses. I have read that some people have found the 18-55 is safe, but only wide open. Also the 27mm and 60mm f2.4 are reported to be safe, but only wide open. What subject is best to shoot in order to confirm a hotspot? Thanks again for the help.
If you are limited to only shooting wide open, that would severely limit DOF, increase softness, and use cases where the lens is worthwhile. I have tested the hot spots on the 18-55mm and I would say that it is not suitable for IR. The 60mm is terrible in IR; I used it to show what bad hot spots look like. The 27mm is not good either. For testing hot spots, I would recommend shooting large tree trunks or pavement, something with a uniform brightness and texture.
@@robshea Thanks Rob. That will be my first step. Thanks for the guidance.
A++ thanks!!!! Anyway you can do a capture one post processing?
You can view my video on using Capture One for infrared here: th-cam.com/video/5yrQisDwp9A/w-d-xo.html
I just brought a Nikon 24mm 1971 2.8 to 16 thats a great lens.
Agreed! I've shot with that one as well. th-cam.com/video/nSV3fjBXS08/w-d-xo.html
I just tested the 150-600mm lens at 150mm, 350mm and 600mm on a 560nm X-T2 and found no hotspots and any aperture.
Your videos and website has been very helpful. I would like to comment on the suitability of the Fuji 16-80 lens. I bought one when they first came out (2 or more years ago?) and was disappointed to find faint hotspots as your hotspot table points out. I continued using my 18-135 until earlier this year whenI started using the 16-80 and, voila, no hotspots. Why is that? No Idea but it must be something to do with the aging of the coating inside the lens. I have using since March 2022 without a single hotspot.
Fascinating. That would suggest that the lens coating used had a very poor lifespan. Not great for product quality in general, but a bonus for IR.
wow good to know, so best would be to buy a really old one^^
Here are the lenses I use for infrared photography:
Fuji X-Pro with 23mm f/1.4 Fujinon lens and 62mm Zomei infrared filter (950nm)
Fuji X-Pro with 23mm f/1.4 Fujinon lens and 62mm Hoya R72 infrared filter (720nm)
Fuji X-Pro with 16mm Fujinon lens and 72mm Green.L IR720 infrared filter with 67-72mm step up ring
Fuji X-Pro with 12mm f/2.8 Zeiss Touit lens and 72mm Green.L IR720 infrared filter with 67-72mm step up ring. No hot spots from f/2.8 open through f/8, but very subtle hot spot at f/11.
Fuji X-Pro with 52mm Hoya R72 infrared filter (720nm) and ...
adapted 28mm f/3.5 Nikon lens (52mm filter thread)
adapted 28mm f/2.8 Nikon lens (52mm filter thread)
adapted 35mm f/2 Nikon lens (52mm filter thread)
Thank you for sharing! I'd like to try the Zeiss 12mm f/2.8. You will get diffraction at apertures above f/5.6 so I wouldn't shoot near f/11 anyways.
Do you have a list of preferred lens for the Fuji GF mounts with the Fuji GFX 50R?
Here is my current list of GF lenses based on research, no first hand experience yet.
Prime
GF 23mm f/4 R LM WR (hot spots)
GF 45mm f/2.8 R WR (good IR) 62mm filter
GF 50mm f/3.5 R LM WR (unknown)
GF 63mm f/2.8 R WR (hot spots)
GF 110mm f/2 R LM WR (unknown)
GF 120mm f/4 Macro R LM OIS WR (good IR)
GF 250mm f/4 R LM OIS WR (good IR)
GF 250mm f/4 R LM OIS WR + 1.4x extender (unknown)
Zoom
GF 32-64mm f/4 R LM WR (hot spots)
GF 45-100mm f/4 R LM OIS WR (good IR)
GF 100-200mm f/5.6 R LM OIS (good IR)
I have a 50R converted to full spectrum. In my experience, using filters, the best performing lens is the 45mm and I've had excellent results with the 45-100mm & 100-200mm. Of the lenses below I do not have the 120mm, but the list is pretty accurate.
Mostly have used 35 mm f/1.4 and f/2, 16-80 mm and 18-135, but also 55-200 mm at big aperture openings
Aside from the obvious focus length differences, have you noticed any major differences between the 16-80 and the 18-135mm? I've been thinking about pairing one of these with a full-spectrum body and building a collection of filters with a single thread size.
@@robshea As far as IR goes they both seem to work well, in the sense that they do not give hot spots. I got the 16-80 mm recently with an X-T4, assuming that it would be of a better optical quality than the 18-135, but I haven't gotten around to testing that assumption. Unfoutunately the 16-80 mm gets pretty soft as one approaches 80 mm, so at the moment I'm not too sure that it is actually bettter than 18-135.
When thinking about full spectrum and a single collection of filters, have you considered clip-in filters? I understand that STC have a set of IR clip-in filters (last option on drop-down list) at shop.stcoptics.com/product/clipfilter_fujifilm/ .
@@kbqvist Good to know. I haven't found any image quality tests for the 16-80mm online. Those filters look interesting. They support a limited number of lenses, including the 18-135mm.
Excellent info, Rob. Do you know if there is any information out there about the fixed lenses on the Fuji X100 series of cameras?
I have them listed here. Generally speaking, most find them good enough for IR, although you may notice hot spots with narrower apertures. blog.robsheaphotography.com/2020/08/17/fuji-x-mount-lenses-for-infrared.html#compact
Hi Rob, thanks for your interesting and informative you tube videos on IR. Do you know how the 8mm-16mm wide zoom works like on a XE1 converted cameras?
Unfortunately, the XF 8-16mm is not good for IR. It's only usable at ƒ/2.8.
Excellent video - I am interested in trying IR photography and have a Fuji X-T3 and S-X10. Neither have been converted and I just want to start off by buying the Hoya R72 IR filter to see if I like it. I have the Fujinon 16-80 that you say is compatible, but is it compatible just with a modified camera or will it give the same results using the Hoya filter? Thank you
Compatible lenses should work with both converted and unconverted cameras. X-T3 should be fine. I did some testing with an unconverted X-S10 and got some odd results. You can see in this video: th-cam.com/video/OwFDbiVdoEc/w-d-xo.html
@@robshea Thank you, I have since watched your video on the Hoya vs Kase filters and I feel the Hoya should be a decent filter to try....so will be indulging very soon!!!
Hi Rob!
Thank you for your comprehensive videos about infrared. It inspired me to pick up a Hoya R72 for my Fuji xf 23mm f2 and 35mm f2. All the resources online I’ve found so far say these lenses work great for infrared so I was super excited that I happened to have that gear ready to try out. However now that I have the filter I’ve noticed some artifacts that are particularly noticeable and distracting to the image. Both have a wide color vignette around their edges when shooting in color as well as two very noticeable hot spots on the left and right side of the frame. I see these at any aperture and in various conditions. Shooting in black and white helps me avoid noticing these artifacts too much but I’d enjoy trying more color infrared images. Any idea why both my copies of these two lenses aren’t producing good infrared images like I thought they would? Would it have anything to do with the angle I’m shooting in respect to sources of IR light? Maybe it is the adapter ring I use? I bought a 46mm filter and adapted it to the 43mm size of the lens. Or could it just be the case that I happened to pick up stinker copies of both these lenses? Any help or insight would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!
Are you using an X-S10? If so, then it's the camera, not the lenses. I noticed this on my X-S10 in this video: th-cam.com/video/OwFDbiVdoEc/w-d-xo.html
If not, what camera are you using?
@@robshea no, I am using an x-t3. I guess there’s a chance it could be my camera which is the stinker copy and not both of my lenses…
@@joeymatsumoto9177 Hmm, it could be the same issue as the X-S10. I doubt it is the lenses as I tried multiple different lenses on the X-S10 and saw the same result with each.
@@robshea Update: I busted out my old X-T20 to do some tests and I found an interesting result. My X-T3 is showing those nasty hot spots on either end of the frame (in landscape) and it’s pretty jarring… my X-T20 shows no hotspots of the sort.
Furthermore, the exposure on my X-T3 is significantly darker than on my X-T20 at the same settings. I don’t really know how to calculate the exact difference in stops, but it sure is a noticeable difference in the shutter speeds to achieve similar looking exposure values. I matched every setting I could to get a good comparison and it’s a pretty clear effect. I wonder if my X-T3 has a problem with its sensor or maybe it just has a much heavier IR filter on it? I’m not sure but I don’t think the sensor has any trouble in the visible light spectrum…
I guess the moral of the story is that the lenses aren’t the problem, my camera is. Sounds like a similar issue to your X-S10, but I’ve never thought the X-T3 would have the same issue. I guess from now on my X-T20 will be my IR camera until further notice.
@@joeymatsumoto9177 Thanks for testing and sharing those details! It certainly appears that the X-T3 and X-S10 both suffer from the same issue when unconverted. They likely have the same sensor, but I've seen no reports of either camera having issues once converted. This leads me to suspect that the hot mirror filter built into these cameras is the issue. This hot mirror would be removed during a conversion, so converted cameras would not have the issue.
The X-T20 is a great camera, with only a slightly smaller sensor, so your image quality should be solid.
Have you tried the X100V in infrared? having trouble finding resources on whether there is a hotspot
LifePixel converts the X100V. I would presume that if they convert it, the lens doesn't have hot spots. You can confirm with them. 590.red/lp
@@robshea Thanks, LifePixel said it was good with no issues.
@@sloemo4024 Excellent!
When testing a lens for hotspots, is there an ideal angle from the sun someone should shoot at? I do have the XF 70-300mm and will be testing it once I get my camera converted.
Bill recently shared an image using the XF 10-24mm, a typically bad rated lens for IR, with no hot spots. (instagram.com/p/CQr2Y5ErxJg/?) He said they had the sun to his back and was curious if that made a difference. Would be good to test. Looking forward to the results from the XF 70-300mm and wondering if it performs better than the XF 55-200mm in IR.
Hi Rob, thanks for your excellent work. Most of the resources mentioned show the 16mm f1.4 as good for IR. I'm also quite happy with it, using on a 590nm converted X-T100. Any ideas as to what causes the variability in results? Regards, Ward
There could be a few factors at play here.
- Filter quality. Lower quality filters could produce worse results. This is one of the challenges with testing in IR, it's impossible to test every lens with every filter and declare a pass/fail. (This is one of the reasons that I like vintage lenses, as they perform dramatically better than modern lenses in regards to hot spots.)
- Lens build quality could be a factor. For example, with the XF 14mm f/2.8, there was a report of concentric rings appearing in IR images for one person. Myself and others didn't see that in our copy. Yet, when I tested with some low-quality ND filters, the concentric rings appeared. Now, when I look at images shot with that lens, I'm seeing the faintest of these concentric rings even without the ND filter. I still think the XF 14mm is a great lens for IR, but it's not perfect. Maybe the XF 16mm f1.4 has a similar issue, where the hot spots appear for some filters, but not others, depending on the build quality.
- The X-T100 uses a Bayer sensor instead of a X-Trans sensor; that could produce different results.
Do you see good results at all apertures? Or do you see hot spots higher f-stop numbers?
probabaly lack of a lens hood or shooting into the sun. hot spots are due to inside of many lenses appearing reflective/silver instead of black under IR light. black aluminum that's often used to make lens barrels is actually transparent in IR so if you take a photo of the lens it appears silver, which obviously bounces light around in a bad way.
hi. I guess xc35 f2 is as good as xf35 f2 for infrared? (they are optically the same)
I would assume so as well, but I've not seen any confirmation from anyone who has used it for IR.
Would love to know if the xf 150-600 is able to work with infrared!
Most of the high-end Fuji zooms work well in IR, but I've not seen any reports on the XF 150-600 yet. I think you should buy it and let us know. 😄
This is a great resource. Thanks for doing this. Did you use a converted camera to test these lenses? If so which camera(s) and which wavelength conversion(s)? Also did you evaluate sharpness or just hot spots? Sorry if you addressed this somewhere and I missed it. There is a dearth of good information out there on IR lens performance so I appreciate your extensive evaluation!
This includes lenses that I own and have tested on a 590nm-converted X-T20 camera. It also includes feedback from viewers and other reputable sources. There is a list of sources at the bottom of the blog article. The video will fall out of date over time, but I will strive to keep the blog updated. blog.robsheaphotography.com/2020/08/17/fuji-x-mount-lenses-for-infrared.html
I didn't evaluate sharpness for this roundup. I do for all of the lenses that I have purchased. I have found these lenses to be very sharp: XF 14mm f/2.8, XF 23mm f/2, XF 50mm f.2, XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8, Samyang/Rokinon 8mm f/2.8, Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f/2.0.
I have sold these lenses due to poor sharpness: XF 16mm f/2.8, XF 18mm f/2
Hi Rob, I’m thinking about purchasing a Fujifilm XT-3 converted body only. I normally shoot with Sony and Canon I’m on a tight budget I have no Fuji lenses which is the least expensive and produces the nicest infrared images another words best bang for the buck.
The XF 18-135mm is the best zoom option. If you want better image quality, I would recommend any of the Fujinon f/2 lenses: XF 23mm f/2 R WR, XF 35mm f/2 R WR, or 50mm f/2 R WR.
You can find a complete list here: blog.robsheaphotography.com/infrared-lenses-fujifilm-x/
@@robshea thanks Rob I mainly use primes.
What about 8-16 fuji lens ?
The 8-16mm f/2.8 lens is only good for IR wide open. I would recommend Fujifilm XF primes, such as the 14mm. I have not yet tested the Fujifilm XF 18mm f/1.4.
@@robshea thnx
Hi Rob. Is there any of the X100 series lenses that do suit infrared photo ?
There is no perfect X100 lens for IR (I believe that the first four models all use the same lens.) But you can get good results with lower f-stops. I've linked to some galleries of those how have used these cameras for IR. blog.robsheaphotography.com/infrared-lenses-fujifilm-x/#compact-cameras-with-prime-lenses
How about the following
7artisans 35mm f1. 2
Viltrox 56 f1.4, 33 and 23
I've checked the typical sources and don't see any reports for any of those lenses yet.
Curious about what type of infrared filter you use? 🖖
I mostly shoot with a 590 nm, second most common is 720, but I've also used 550, 740, 830, 850, 950, and IR Chrome.
@@robshea
I recently saw a video where a guy had had his XT3 sensor changed to infrared only. 🖖
@@benjones8977 Sounds like the Thomas Heaton video. He converted directly to a 720 nm filter. You can convert to a specific filter or you can convert to full spectrum. A full spectrum conversion allows you to use a variety of external filters, infrared high-pass (550, 590, 720, 830, etc.), multiband (IR Chrome), and even Ultraviolet.
Thank you thank you thank you :)))
Here's another one for your list: Laowa 4mm f2.8 circular fisheye is fine at all apertures.
Thanks for sharing!
I have a full spectrum Fuji XT-1. Do I have to use a visible light band filter in order to shoot standard (visible light) photography, or do I get away with just taking off the IR filter and shooting normally? @ Rob Shea
In order to shoot visible light only on a full spectrum camera, you will need to use an external hot mirror filter. The hot mirror will block UV and IR light, only allowing visible light to pass to the sensor.
@@robshea Sir, you are a hero of our society!
I just bought 7Artisans 60mm f/2.8 Macro MKII and used it with a Hoya 720nm filter - there's no hotspot at all, to my eyes. Is there anything like a safe testing procedure?
Select a flat subject in direct sunlight, such as pointing down to a section of sidewalk or road. Take a shot at each full stop aperture, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, etc. Compare the images on your computer to look for differences. Shooting on a tripod will make is easier to compare the images.
@@robshea 7Artisans 60mm f2.8 Macro MKII is usable only up to f/5,6 - it's not practical to use it for macro IR photography, because macro photography requires much DOF, it can be done but it's not my cup of tea. You're positive that Venus Laowa 65mm f/2.8 2X Ultra Macro APO has no hotspot at all?
@@darioemichelabasile7385 I have not personally used the Laowa 65mm f/2.8. Another viewer indicated that it was good.
@@robshea confirmed: it's perfect
I tried Viltrox 23mm F/1.4. Moderately bad for hotspots
Added to blog. Thanks! 590.red/xf
lower aperture means for ex f8- f22 right?
Lower-numbered or wider apertures are better for avoiding hot spots.
@@robshea like 16-50. It is usable only at 3.5-8, right?
@@patpat5557 Correct
NISI 9mm is excelent for IR
Thanks! Added to the list on my site.
Whoops … I need to revise my comment after reading your reply to another comment about the 16-80. I probably will change my Christmas wish to the 14mm. :)
The 18-135mm is probably your best bet for a zoom, but I'm partial to primes and can certainly recommend the 14mm.
If you want to update your list with this, Fujifilm X70 has a bad hotspot at all apertures.
I am both happy and sad for this. Sad because I was planning to convert my X70 to IR and happy because you shared this before I did. Thanks for the update!
Just to confirm, what this a converted or unconverted X70? I'm seeing some reports that the X100 series cameras have worse hot spots in unconverted cameras, but little/no hot spots when converted.
@@robshea it's unconverted