Groups I Moderate:

FUJIFILM X-T ⌘ PURE LANDSCAPES Pool

FUJIFILM X-T2 ⌘ Gathering Place

FUJIFILM X-T3 ⌘ Gathering Place

FUJIFILM X-T4 ⌘ Gathering Place

FUJIFILM X-T5 ⌘ Gathering Place

FUJIFILM X-H2 ⌘ Gathering Place

Sony α7/α9/α1 with ADAPTED Lenses Only

About me:

Ok, let me get this out of the way first:

If you are a photographer and think there is a climate emergency, that CO2 is a pollutant and we need to plaster wind generator and solar farms all over pristine nature; then please unfollow me now. Thank You!

What seems a long time ago, I emigrated from the edge of the Black Forest, to the backwoods of the Yukon.

My inner compass always pointed North/North-West, and if I had been born in the 1700-1800s, I quite possibly would have joined up with one of the great explorers, who all needed plenty of elbow-room.

I appreciate your favorites, comments and critique!

There are some incredible talented photographers on Flickr and it's a pleasure to look at their pictures, check out their techniques and learn from them.

It's also a nice way to see the world through the eyes of many and it doesn't cost a penny. [maybe I should trademark that one]

Current Equipment:

Fujifilm X-T2

Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD [Newest addition and so far very satisfied with corner sharpness]

XF18-55mm [so-so lens]

XF10-24mm [excellent lens]

XF35 f2 [so-so lens]

MCEX-11 [not much more useful than close-up lenses]

NIKKOR 300mm f4.5 ED-IF AI-s MF w. Metabones NF-X-mount Adapter [not terribly sharp lens]

NIKKOR 180mm f/2.8 ED AI-s MF [heavy, fairly sharp but use it less]

Nikon Ai-S Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8 MF w, Metabones NF-X-mount Adapter [sharpest lens I ever owned and a keeper even if I may use it less now with the Tamron 17-70]

MMZ-Lomo Helios 44-2 58mm/f2 M42 Lens w. FotoDiox M42-FX/M Variable Close Focus Adapter [interesting, experimental, looking to replace it with a MC HELIOS 77m-4 50mm f/1.8 Lens]

Tokina AT-X 100-300mm f4 MF Lens & Metabones NF-X-mount Adapter. My first tele-zoom from way back. Reasonably sharp when carefully focused in good light.

Tokina AT-X 80-200mm f2.8 MF Lens & Metabones NF-X-mount Adapter. Latest adapted lens, bought mint, with everything originally included. Faster, sharper lens with a tripod mount that is not quite as stable as on the AT-X 100-300. I'm having lots of fun with these manual lenses.

I sold my Fujifilm XF18-135 lens because I think the lens is of substandard quality and I had a whole range of issues with it, which I outlined in my review on Amazon. The zoom range was great though.

Panasonic Lumix GX1 converted to Full-Spectrum by Spencer's Camera & Photo, with an unfortunate dust problem behind the sensor-glass, which starts showing between f8-f22.

This is less of an issue when shooting at f5.6, the sweet-spot of the lens I'm using. I believe most conversions have a risk of including some dust particles between sensor and cover-glass, no matter how clean of an environment it was converted in. Generally sensor dust may be a bit more visible when photographing in the IR spectrum, but it depends on the quality of the available light.

I very much like the GX1, except for lacking a viewfinder. Framing shots on bright, sunny days [infrared-days!] year-round, is almost impossible without a good viewfinder. I have worked around the problem by using any fabric available over my head and camera to block out light, just like in the field-camera days. (Have the optional EVF now, which is a major improvement to this camera)

I use the Lumix G-Vario 14-45mm f3.5-5.6 Legacy Lens, which is of better quality than the newer kit lenses and reasonably sharp; and sometimes the Tokina 100-300mm f4 with a Nikon to MFT adapter, which comes out rather soft at the long end and often is difficult to focus at infinity.

Infrared conversions focus differently, so it is essential to pick the right lens for infrared. The conversion services mostly use the kit-lenses for calibration, but can adjust the focus to any lens supplied. Many lenses also show a center hot-spot, so it is essential to read which lenses work and which don't, or test accordingly. [the Samyang 7.5mm f3.5 ultra-wide angle lens does not focus to infinity on my converted GX1]

For filters I'm using the 590nm from Rocolax [Extreme Color or Goldie Filter], the 665nm [Amplified Color] and the 830nm [Black & White] IR-Pass Filters in 77mm size from Spencer's, which all work great. And Spencer's IR-Cut Filter in 55mm for 'normal' visible shooting. My favorite IR-Filter is the 665nm, which warm colors suit me best during the winter. All filters are mounted to custom-made Rapid-change Bayonet Filter Adapters, which simplify shooting of the same scene with different filters within seconds. [white balance calibration required]* [contact me if interested in these adapters]

*I white-balance often, certainly before each session, sometimes even when changing photographic angle during the same session. Perfect WB is essential for infrared photography. I use a high quality grey-card, but also test against white/green, the sky or the palm of my hand, if nothing else is available. Therefore, a camera that allows for several custom WB Presets is preferable. I only use AWB with the IR-Cut filter for 'normal' shooting, even there it's always a good idea to verify with a grey-card.

Another point I like to make is that to get good infrared results [nice colors, rich contrast] it is essential to have your digital camera converted, i.e. hot-mirror filter stack removed.

Just slapping an IR-Pass filter on a lens isn't doing any good if the camera still has the IR-Cut filter inside. These lens filters don't boost IR-intake into the camera. All they do is reduce available light, change the light spectrum [distort colors], and lead to dull pictures and frustrating photography. So for some to suggest they do any good in the digital age, as they did during the infrared-film days, is misleading. [of course there are some cameras with relative weak IR-Cut filters, which may give okay results with external IR filters]

I also think IR-Pass filters should be described by their actual spectrum classification, i.e. 590nm, instead of 'Extreme Color' filter. I want people to know which filter I was using for each shot. That's why I note the nanometer number of the filter I was using in my description. So others may learn.

In regards to IR-Cut filters for full-spectrum conversions. I have tried a few filters which did not completely cut the infrared spectrum. The B+W489 and Rocolax brand filters won't work. Even the B+W486 is not a blocking, but an infrared interference filter. It's very important to find a true blocking filter, or there will be IR edge-bleeding of cyan color into the corners of the images and greens and reds negatively affected.

I ended up with the IR-Cut filter from Spencer's Camera & Photo simply because it showed perfect colors and was better priced for the size I needed. It's also very lightweight and low-profile.

Any filter brand that uses the Schott BG38 or BG40 glass should work fine.

Regarding post-processing I can only say that it is up to the artist to push the colors in any direction he/she may like. There is no true color of anything, if one includes the light spectrum that is invisible to the human eye. Personally I prefer warm contrasty colors, not overdone, over cool smooth [dull] color compositions. To get brilliant infrared shots, one needs to go outside when the sun is shining, and photograph at the correct angle to it. After a while an infrared photographer develops another sense for when the light is perfect. Sun and clouds help a great deal. Clouds are simply fantastic to get great contrast, but also to cover an otherwise boring sky, that tends to show IR artifacts or uneven from one corner to the other.

Most infrared portraits I have seen look ghostly, but I have also seen a few nice ones, so I presume it depends on the filter, quality, angle, and intensity of the sun to get a usable image.

I don't use large watermarks or frames.

I see some incredible distracting and obtrusive watermarks and frames used by some who think this is the way to protect their images from being stolen or for display/advertising reasons. I generally don't favor these images, except when the watermark is somewhere in the corner or bottom of the picture. I have no illusions on becoming a paid photographer, there is just too much good stuff out there. Anyone with a decent camera and an eye and sense for THAT moment can come up with a professional image.

So I don't care if my pictures get shared around, but I'd still appreciate to know when someone finds them interesting.

Frames? I think they were meant for pictures to be hung on a wall, quite simply. I sometimes add them when I convert to monochrome and want to create a vintage look.

I used to shoot RAW only, then post-process in Aperture, PS, and use various Plugins and some of the fantastic iPad Apps to improve or alter some images to reflect my preference or artistic disposition. However, since shooting with Fujifilm I use their excellent JPGs a lot, with very little improvements necessary. Edit: I switched most of my processing to Lightroom now, as it does such a good job with highlight and shadow recovery. I'm also using several of the great products by Topaz Labs. Recently I got into Skylum Aurora HDR and use it quite a lot. It's one of the smartest HDR apps I've used and the basic processing is almost always spot on and not overprocessing colors, contrast etc.

My prime camera now is the Fujifilm X-T2, which is an awesome camera to use. 100% satisfied so far. The reviews are mostly positive on the X-T2 and most of the criticism I read do not apply to my kind of shooting. The camera was hyped quite a bit in the media and ads, but is still under-rated by some review sites in my opinion. Edit: I have not considered the X-T3 as an upgrade and will wait for the X-T4 or the X-H2 to see what FujiFilm can improve in features and most important in IQ. I still long for some better IQ. The X-H2 would be interesting to use with my Nikon lenses as it has IBIS. I also think their X-S10 model is very attractive for the price.

Edit: I have set my eyes on a X-H2 for the better resolution and body design over the new X-T5. I always longed for the better grip and angled shutter release and the IBIS of course. Some of the mechanical features of the X-T line I never used, like the compensation wheel, so the PASM design is not really an issue for me. But I am tempted by the Nikon Z7 series too, except for the price.

Camera's I owned:

First camera Porst Happy or Diana DE LUXE. Hong Kong made. All Plastic! It was a subscription gift from the German daily newspaper Südkurier. Age 10-12? I can still smell the plastic!

Rollei B35 [first foreign trip to London and South of England in 1975]

Konica T3 & T4

Nikon F301

Nikon FM2 [my favorite SLR]

Rollei 35SE [back to another pocketable camera]

Nikon N2020 [used]

Canon ZR50/ZR70 video cameras [crappy stills, super zoom, bought to shoot movies of my kids growing up]

Panasonic Lumix FZ10 [returned due to JPG artifacts]

HP 945 [very good image quality for a 5MP camera, infrequent moire issue, my sister still taking nice photos with it]

Nikon D50 [horizon crooked, never got attached to it]

Panasonic Lumix FZ35 [IQ decent if shooting RAWs, shot many nice landscapes and macro with it, but too slow for any action]

Panasonic Lumix GX1 [current, next best thing between the Rollei B35 and Nikon FM2]

Fujifilm X-T1 [took me back to my Nikon FM2 days, menu and controls not yet perfect so I sold it]

Fujifilm X-T2 [totally attached to this camera. Nothing I would change except for a better sensor, bigger battery, maybe IBIS and forgo the E-compensation dial, which I never use]

Cameras I found/find interesting:

Sony A7 system

Samsung NX1 (great features but short history)

Olympus OM-D E-M1 successor [the E-M10 is great, but a little too small for my hands! MFT has an awesome selection of lenses but prices are in the APS-C class now]

Panasonic Lumix GX8

Nikon DL line [as compact backup, if it ever materializes] Edit: Nikon Fail obviously.

Nikon FM2 D digital [if Nikon ever gets their act together] Edit: The Nikon Z line looks promising. Edit: Zf just released and that could be it, but in features it's still behind Fujifilm's T/H series.

Here are some helpful resources to get started with infrared photography. Edit: some links may become outdated.

How do I change the colors from the original reddish tone to that "Blue Sky" tone

Full-Spectrum - The Ultimate, Versatile Conversion

Basic Infrared Photoshop Techniques Tutorial & IR Instructions | LifePixel Digital Infrared

Life Pixel Digital Infrared Filter Comparison Photos

Infrared Photoshop Tutorials & DIY Infrared Conversion Instructions

Infrared Tutorials | Kolari Vision Infrared Photography Techniques

Common Problems with Infrared and how to avoid them | Kolari Vision Infrared

Lens Hotspot Performance Database | Kolari Vision Infrared

Hot Mirror UVIR Cut Filter | Kolari Vision Infrared Conversion Service and IR Photography

Infrared Atelier's Infrared Photography Blog | Fine Art Infrared Photography by Mark Hilliard

Understanding 590nm (Goldie) Issues | Infrared Atelier's Infrared Photography Blog

Processing Infrared Shots in Adobe Camera RAW | Steve Castle

Luminosity Masks in Photoshop

Tony Kuyper Photography‚ Using Luminosity Masks‚ Introduction

IR RAW processing - Khromagery

Toning Photoshop-Ken Rockwell

DPanswer: Digital Infrared Resource page

All You Ever Wanted to Know About UV and IR Photography

And Last but not Least. If you like my work and would like to support me towards camera equipment upgrades, buy any of my photographs or employ my photographic talent, please contact me via message. If you run a commercial website making money off it and ask me for permission to use my photos, I'd appreciate an offer or donation. I'm also going after people who disregard the copyright on commercial use with the help of Pixsy.

Thanks for visiting!