Yes Michael, but 489 has Filter Factor 1.2 and 486 factor 1 . 489 maybe change color more, becouse has some colour smell, so not be realy transparent. If you want use polarizer you can attache 486 on polarizer. But i dont know if for this realy help IR cut-off/hot mirror filter, this is for me only theory. Maybe sony do some conclusion about this, is for me this IR contamination if really is, problem.

Well, the 486 would need to be used in front of the other filters because it needs to reflect the IR. The 489 can be used under other filters because it absorbs the IR. This seems more useful if you are using a 35mm adapter for example. So the 489 can go on the camera lens instead of on the Nikon or PL lens in front. Also, if you use a matte box the 486 screw in is no good.

Well, "interference" between layers on the 486 'sounds' like its not reflecting it like a mirror either. Here's what is says:

"This B&W 77mm 486 Digital UV/IR Blocking Slim Glass Filter has a completely colorless glass carrier coated with a number of extremely thin, partially reflecting layers with precisely computed thicknesses, similar to MC coating (multi-coating).

The B&W Filter 486 does not block by means of absorption, but by interference of the unwanted UV and IR radiation that is repeatedly reflected between these layers affecting the wavelengths on both sides of the visible spectrum with a steep cut-off.

B&W slim filters are for wide-angle lenses and are 3mm thick. They do not have a front thread.

Key Features

• Used mainly on digital and video cameras with CCD sensors without an integrated IR protection filter, because the IR sensitivity of the CCD sensor would otherwise cause color changes and unsharpness.
• That unsharpness results from the chromatic aberration of the lenses that are only corrected for visible light.
• In the visible range, the transmission curve is very high and straight."

---
If it does not work, I will have to get tiffen Hot Glass 4x4 and place it in front of my mattebox - since I use polas and grads all the time shooting high contrast sunsets.

QUESTION?!

If RED light like a sunset gives off more IR, and creates more distortion...
Then, wouldn't a BLUER setting, or cooling filter reduce IR - and then in post one could warm it up with less IR???

PS - I get my filter tomorrow. I will try to shoot some tests this weekend and post ASAP.

Thanks Greg. I'm looking forward to hearing and possibly viewing your findings.

QUESTION?!

If RED light like a sunset gives off more IR, and creates more distortion...
Then, wouldn't a BLUER setting, or cooling filter reduce IR - and then in post one could warm it up with less IR???

PS - I get my filter tomorrow. I will try to shoot some tests this weekend and post ASAP.

That might "fix" it but I'm pretty sure that would make you have other problems such as areas that aren't suffering from this shift because there is adequate light reflecting off of some of the subject matter in your shot. So even though those few spots that are giving you problems, are corrected, I think you'd see other problems creep in to areas that are being represented accurately.

Dave

Guys,

I am a Chemist by trade and work with spectroscopic equipment all the time. We use interference filters quite often. Essentially it works by setting up the filter so the light that you do not want transmitted is used to cancel itself out. Without going into the physics of it the fancy optics generate interference patterns in the IR (and in this case UV) light waves that are 180 degrees out of phase with the incoming radiation effectively blocking its transmittance into the lens. The fact that it is a sharp cut filter means that it will not interfere with the visible wavelengths - therefore you should see not interference at all in the visible range if the filter is well built - and with a B&W that is likely. The absorptive filters use chemical compounds embedded in the glass that absorb specific wavelengths of IR radiation. Of course this means that they may get a bit warm if there is excessive IR (the energy has to go somewhere) - but this is not a likely scenario with a camera filter where we are talking about small amounts.

Bottom line is that it is likely that the filter will work well - but we will see shortly. The proof is in the testing!

Just got my filter today from B&H. So far, it appears to work great at getting rid of the RED cast when filming certain black fabrics in lower light situations.

I will post some before and after shots when I get a chance.

Paul

That's great news Paul. Just for fun I put a piece of Rosco heat shield in front of the lens today, and it did make a small difference. Certainly not optically clear, but it did help to prove that it is an IR problem.

-Sean

Paul that are really great news! For me this was the main problem of my Ex1.

What do you guys think? Have we all to buy this filter for 200$ or will Sony offer us an "upgrade"? Why did Sony not just build such a filter directly into the camcorder... for them this will maybe make the cam 40$ more expensive, but that's much better than angry customers and wrong colors.

Here in Germany some TV stations bought also the Ex1. I would bet they will get an "upgrade" from Sony!

Great news Paul, I expected that it would work well.

On another note - do you ever intercut your HV20 footage with the EX1? Just wondering as I also have both of these, and haven't done it just yet. If you have I was wondering how the HV20 held up. I have been to busy to try it, but have been thinking they might look OK together in good light

Great news Paul, I expected that it would work well.

On another note - do you ever intercut your HV20 footage with the EX1? Just wondering as I also have both of these, and haven't done it just yet. If you have I was wondering how the HV20 held up. I have been to busy to try it, but have been thinking they might look OK together in good light


Graeme, here is a comparison between EX1 (TC2, and my preset) and a HV20.
http://rapidshare.com/files/93376520/EX1_TC2_Hisat_vs_HV20.mp4.html

Dennis

Here you go....a before and after shot using the IR 486 Filter.
Top is with no filter...bottom is with the 486 IR Filter.

Here is the link to the filter that I bought: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/235343-REG/B_W__77mm_486_Digital_UV_IR.html?BI=805&KBID=1062

So Paul, is this a kind of filter that you can leave on the camera permanently, and put the stock lens hood over it?

YES....the lens hood fits over it just fine.
I plan on just leaving it on all the time.
I haven't noticed any problems with it so far.

Good... I've just shot some indoor scenes where my daughter was wearing a dark-blue shirt; on the monitor it's magenta!

One thing still worries me, though: when using a 35mm adapter with different lenses, can it stay on the camera? Or will its reflecting IR rather than absorbing it be a problem?

@Zene:

Surely you're not relying on auto white balance?
And you're not using a ND filter indoors in low light?
And you're using enough light to eliminate the color noise?

I'm pretty sure it's a white balance problem because the color tint on the box corresponds to the color tint of the floor in each photo. There's a reason why pro cameras you allow you to set white balance manually, sir.

Anyone know where we can get these filters in the UK ?

Thanks,Paul.

@Zene:

Surely you're not relying on auto white balance?
And you're not using a ND filter indoors in low light?
And you're using enough light to eliminate the color noise?

I'm pretty sure it's a white balance problem because the color tint on the box corresponds to the color tint of the floor in each photo. There's a reason why pro cameras you allow you to set white balance manually, sir.

Of course, all no, is IR contamination problem not wrong WB and not ND of course. Paul presented this can be resolve my problem with IR cut-off filter. HC3 is not pro and can change WB manually too :)

Definitely IR, has nothing to do with WB, or any PP settings. Interestingly enough, this happens on two other CMOS cameras I've worked with recently which cost MUCH more (RED and VR Phantom HD). Haven't noticed it with the Arri D-20, but I'll be at CSC on Tuesday and I'll look at it for fun. According to RED, they use as strong of an IR filter as is appropriate, partly an engineering problem. 3-chip designs require a LOT of optical engineering, so it makes sense for sony to use as light of a filter as possible behind the lens.

-Sean

First, I did point it at my remote and could see the IR light blinking. Then with the filter on, it removed it.

Second, I was shooting out my deck at 5600K at a pine tree. Adding the filter, quickly removed the warmth (from extra IR). You still had good reds and the rest of the colors, but there was absolutely extra red from IR. It was similar to the slight greenish look of Rayband sunglasses. NOTE - it also cuts UV too.

I did not see any increase in sharpness per say, but it did seem a tiny bit cleaner. I'm still waiting for a sunset and will give a before and after shots.

I will have my new laptop late next week, so I can finally offload and post footage and stills. Lastly the 486 comes with a nice lense cap too.

Here you go....a before and after shot using the IR 486 Filter.
Top is with no filter...bottom is with the 486 IR Filter.

Here is the link to the filter that I bought: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/235343-REG/B_W__77mm_486_Digital_UV_IR.html?BI=805&KBID=1062

Thanks Paul.

Granted this is one shot and resized for the web, are you seeing a difference?

Thanks Paul.

Granted this is one shot and resized for the web, are you seeing a difference?

YES....so far, it seams to solve the IR contamination problem without creating other problems in the process.

Thanks Paul.

Hi

Im using a Cokin ND P154 (ND8 - 0.9) in front of my Canon FD lens and Letus EX. I can see a weird brown/magenta tint on the picture.

First pic is with the Cokin ND and the 2nd is without. Notice the color of my portabrace bag in the third pic. It looks magenta/pink instead of dark blue that it is. And the little camera bag besides the portabrace is supposed to look pink.

I dont see any change in colour when I put the Cokin ND it in front of my eye. Is this the same IR problem discussed in this thread?

Sami

Anyone have an opinion?

Sami

Sami,

While black fabrics do have the tendency to show brownish (just like the blue ones often show magenta), I guess in those particular grabs the main factor is WB being way too warm.

Sami,

While black fabrics do have the tendency to show brownish (just like the blue ones often show magenta), I guess in those particular grabs the main factor is WB being way too warm.

But my WB was the same in both shots, with and without the Cokin ND. Do you mean I should redo WB after putting the ND on?

I would... Yes, I know ideally the concept of the ND filter is not to affect wavelength.

yes you're right, if I redo the WB with the ND on it chances the reading by 200-300 kelvins.

So this means there is no way I can use my Cokin grad filter cause the lower half would need different WB.

Is this because the Cokin ND's are quite cheap or would this be the same with any ND with the EX1?

yes you're right, if I redo the WB with the ND on it chances the reading by 200-300 kelvins.

So this means there is no way I can use my Cokin grad filter cause the lower half would need different WB.

Is this because the Cokin ND's are quite cheap or would this be the same with any ND with the EX1?

Now that's a good question.
I'm not sure who has deep enough pockets to find that one out. ;)

I'd say that a 200-300K difference should not be a show stopper, Sami. To my eye, your left grabs are too warm by some 1500K at least. Something else must have happened to your WB settings in this shooting...

I'd say that a 200-300K difference should not be a show stopper,

Good point. That small would probably not be noticeable.

I'd say that a 200-300K difference should not be a show stopper, Sami. To my eye, your left grabs are too warm by some 1500K at least. Something else must have happened to your WB settings in this shooting...

I'm testing it now. Without cokin ND Auto WB gives 9100K (Sun is setting here), with Cokin ND Auto WB gives 8800. After setting AWB both look fine. But with 9100K and ND in front of the lens it looks as magenta as the screen crabs I posted. Ill get back to this later, should I start a new thread? I feel like Im overtaking the original one...

I have this problem bad. I shoot in the desert where the temperature of the desert floor can go to 150F. All my green shrubbery has gone brown and the sand colored desert a redish hue.

Does anyone know what I can do for this? Is there a IR filter for this extreme situation?

I have this problem bad. I shoot in the desert where the temperature of the desert floor can go to 150F. All my green shrubbery has gone brown and the sand colored desert a redish hue.

Does anyone know what I can do for this? Is there a IR filter for this extreme situation?

We've ordered 3 off 486 filters but B&W must be experiencing heavy demand as they're on back order. Once we get them I can tell you how well they work although others here say they seem to fix the problem nicely. Our plan is to leave them on the camera as well as anything that goes into a MB.
This is a very common problem though. The Redone is having the same problem, I've read of people having it with the DVX100 as well.

We've ordered 3 off 486 filters but B&W must be experiencing heavy demand as they're on back order. Once we get them I can tell you how well they work although others here say they seem to fix the problem nicely. Our plan is to leave them on the camera as well as anything that goes into a MB.
This is a very common problem though. The Redone is having the same problem, I've read of people having it with the DVX100 as well.

Bob:
I just ordered one in size 77mm for about $200 and they said it was in stock. They have the slim-line that will work with the Sony sun shade and with the adapter for my matte box. I'll see if it works. The EX1 needs a protector there anyway and I can sell the 77mm B+W UV I have still new in the box. Anyone want it?

Just found out an interesting piece of information, when the F23 was first released, some cameras experienced black reflective fabrics reading as magenta or sometimes blue. Sound familiar? Turns out, it was a bad batch of IR filters which were replaced, solving the problem. I'm thinking about Sony and trying to initiate the conversation...

-Sean

Just found out an interesting piece of information, when the F23 was first released, some cameras experienced black reflective fabrics reading as magenta or sometimes blue. Sound familiar? Turns out, it was a bad batch of IR filters which were replaced, solving the problem. I'm thinking about Sony and trying to initiate the conversation...

-Sean

Yes let's find out. We have a problem here in that we discuss an issue and think it is not a camera problem and spend money doing a home fix when really with a loud shout to Sony they might come clean and cough-up.

I contacted Sony today an officially registered a complaint. They said it was the first they had heard about it but would look into it and get back to me. I referred them to this thread and the fact that the same thing happened with the F23 when it was first released. Perhaps if we all do this they will at least compensate us for the filters we have to buy to make the camera work properly.

-Sean

In Adam Wilt's test he saw this on both the F-23 and the Ex-1.

Can I put the 486 over my Ex-1 lens then add a 35mm adapter over it, or do I always want the 486 to be on the front?

In Adam Wilt's test he saw this on both the F-23 and the Ex-1.

Can I put the 486 over my Ex-1 lens then add a 35mm adapter over it, or do I always want the 486 to be on the front?

I second that question!

Also, I believe Sean is right - we should all complain to Sony about the red problem; realy don't see a reason for $200 expenditure and hassle with additional filter just to get right colours from a CineAlta, "professional" camera...

I second that question!

Also, I believe Sean is right - we should all complain to Sony about the red problem; realy don't see a reason for $200 expenditure and hassle with additional filter just to get right colours from a CineAlta, "professional" camera...

Is my problem the same? My reds are too orange. When I put up my color bars my red bar is orange. I take a cherry red jacket and I can not get the color right unless I color correct. This turns my orange colors pink. I am getting much better reds with my Canon A1. What can I do?

Don Deignan

that sounds different. This problem is really only visible on black subjects with certain dyes in them that reflect IR light. Sounds like a processing problem, although I don't think it's related to this. It does seem like it is a processing problem, and we should start a new thread about it so as not to hijack this one.

-Sean

I have a 77mm B+W 486 IR Cut (blocking) filter, I can't remember who else makes them (at the time I was looking for this solution, all I could find in the States, was this filter by B+W, which I got from B&H)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/475095-REG/B_W_65031976_77mm_486_Digital_UV_IR.html

I'm wondering if this is how this particular sensor reacts to differing wavelengths. As I did not encounter this with my Canon XHA1 or older Sony DV camcorders.

Outdoor use in San Diego, I can't see much noticeable difference. Outdoor use when I was up north closer to the Arctic in Canada, I really could see a difference, especially in Reds, Greens and Blacks. I manually white balanced and included a white/gray reference in the beginning of each shot, so I know the balance was correct. I also noticed a difference in this situation with my Canon HV20 as well as the PMW-EX1.

Then indoors under various types of indoor lighting I started noticing this effect as well by using and not using the filter, which varied under different types of lighting. Again this effect is stronger than with the Canon XHAI in the same setup.

I stumbled on a few German sites that discussed this type of filter and there were actually stronger ones mentioned, that I have been unable to find here, one was darker in color and reduced light by about 2-stops.

Maybe one of our more tech savvy engineer memebers can shed some more light on this. But this filter does help a lot with this camera's sensor, I'd still like to find even a stronger one. Of course I haven't shot in a red room or set yet.


Brian - or anyone else - does this filter fit under the EX1 hood? I would prefer it to the slimline version as I can attach things to the external thread if necessary. I know that the slimline version does fit.

I ended up buying the B+W 489 instead of the 486 as the 486 did not work with 35mm adapters because it has to reflect the light back and it would be behind the adapter. The 489 absorbs it instead of reflecting it and it works great with the Mini35 for example.

Michael,

Does the 489 fit under the hood, and does it have a thread on the outside?

Michael,

Does the 489 fit under the hood, and does it have a thread on the outside?

If it fits under the hood I have no idea, as I haven't tried that yet. I always use a mattebox. But it does have a thread on the outside.

I ended up buying the B+W 489 instead of the 486 as the 486 did not work with 35mm adapters because it has to reflect the light back and it would be behind the adapter. The 489 absorbs it instead of reflecting it and it works great with the Mini35 for example.

Do I understand it right, that you will need one such filter for each lense you're using with your 35mm adapter (if they are different filter thread size, of course)?

there is so many glass in a mini35 adapter , i doubt a filter would still be necessary.
imagine that you add , the lens, the gg screen, the condenser, the macro lens. and you still need to go through the camera lens.

there is so many glass in a mini35 adapter , i doubt a filter would still be necessary.
imagine that you add , the lens, the gg screen, the condenser, the macro lens. and you still need to go through the camera lens.

And yet, even with the Letus and a 50mm Canon lense, the black clothes are still brownish when shot in artificial light.