Showing posts sorted by relevance for query kuribayashi. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query kuribayashi. Sort by date Show all posts

Monday, February 25, 2013

Soligor 35mm vs Kuribayashi 35mm lens for reflected UV photography

Today about the Soligor f3.5 / 35mm (older style) lens in comparison to the aforementioned Kuribayashi f3.5 / 35mm lens (also sold under the Petri brand name), a quite capable lens for reflected UV photography I have written about both lenses before here. I'm using a yellow/red Phalaenopsis flower for that and my "work horse" UV filter, the Baader-U filter plus the deeper reaching Jupiter-U filter. Light source was an UV enhanced Xenon flash. All shots done at f8 and presented on a side-a-side format for easier comparison, left the Soligor, right the Kuribayashi lens.

[click on image to see a larger one]

Visible light image:
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm, effective peak approx. 375nm):
 

UV image using Jupiter-U filter (approx. 280-385nm, effective peak approx. 365nm):
 

SOLIGOR lens transmission:


As I have written before, the Kuribayashi 35mm lens is quite a useful one for UV, sharp and contrasty and only having a 1.03% focus shift. The Soligor 35mm shows 1.3% focus shift and also some other differences, like a needed 2/3 stop higher exposure, as its UV transmission is lower than the one of the Kuribayashi lens. In terms of sharpness they are about even, but the Kuribayashi has the higher contrast. So in total the Soligor 35mm is a useful lens, yet reaches not quite the Kuribayashi.


Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Three 40mm lenses for reflected UV photography

Today about a comparison of three lenses of 40mm focal length for reflected UV, one a Cooke Triplet (C40), one a Dialyte design (D40), one a complex Sonnar design (S40) whose makers will be revealed here later - or simply contact me about it. The best of the three will also compared against the Kuribayashi 35mm. I'm using a yellow/red Phalaenopsis flower for that and my "work horse" UV filter, the Baader-U filter. Light source was an UV enhanced Xenon flash. All shots were done at f8 and are presented in a side-a-side format for easier comparison.

[click on image to see a larger one]

UV image using the Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm, effective peak approx. 375nm) - Cooke left, Dialyte middle, Sonnar right:
 

Here the three contestants present themselves side-a-side: It gets obvious, that the Sonnar is the softest of the three and has a bit less UV transmission (the latter had to be expected). The Cooke triplet lens and especially the Dialyte however show some respectable sharpness. So lets's have a closer look at the latter two.

UV image using the Baader-U filter - Cooke left, Dialyte right:
 

Here, the Dialyte has an edge over the Triplet, quite higher micro-contrast and higher detail reproduction, quite remarkable, considering it is an old prewar lens, and uncoated. So let's see how that Dialyte performs against the Kuribayashi 35mm.

UV image using the Baader-U filter - Dialyte lft, Kuribayashi 35mm right:
 

Here now it is hard to choose a winner, as both have very high sharpness and contrast, quite remarkable considering their age difference. I'm undicided honestly.

Transmission graph:
 

The Triplet is represented by a yellow line, the Dialyte by a reddish brown line, the Sonnar by a blue line and finally the Kuribayashi by a pink line. Transmisson of all lenses is quite high, at 365nm Sonnar: 60%, Dialyte: 64%, Triplet: 70% and finally the Kuribayashi 77%. Their reach into UV is quite remarkable, the Kuribayashi and Dialyte having the deepest, Triplet surprisingly the least, maybe caused by its bluish coating. So overall, some remarkable lenses for reflected UV.

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Saturday, July 28, 2012

Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens for reflected UV photography

Now this today was based on an information I got from a forum,  that the Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens was very capable of working for reflected UV photography.

I tested that lens and it performed even better (pink line) than the well known Noflexar f3.5/35mm lens (red line), reaching down into UV to about 320nm. At 365nm it even has a 12% higher transmission (1/4 stop).

[click on image to see a larger one]



There are a few similar looking re-branded emanations of that Kuri lens, but with lesser performance, so be aware of that. These and a few other emanations of basically the same lens were not my finds, but Boon Tang and Alex Holovachov deserve the credit for those finds and bringing it to my attention. I'm not sure if later made models may have the same good transmittance, as the coating may have been changed to more modern ones that unfortunately suppress UV to pass (blue coating color is an indication for that). Here for instance the Prinzgalaxy f3.5/35mm in comparison, that shows a about 20% lower transmission at 365nm, but still useful (1/2 stop less):



And here one of SOLIGOR brand:


Here now a quick photographic test of that original Kuribayashi 35mm lens, which shows virtually no focus shift (1.03%), as well as very good sharpness and very good contrast in reflected UV using the Baader-U filter:



Here the visual shot for comparison:


The little downside that it only focuses to about one meter (3 ft) can be overcome by using a small helicoid or tube, if so needed. Here the Noflexar 35mm has an edge, as it has a built in close focus ability to about 1:2 (0.5x) magnification.

So this "zebra" barrel styled Kuribayashi lens from the 50ies / 60ies is a very welcomed new lens to the very few "normal" i.e. non quartz fluorite ones that does perform very well.

There is a part II about this lens HERE.

Photographic comparison between the Kuribayashi and the Soligor lens is HERE.


Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Friday, June 30, 2017

Petri Kuribayashi 35mm vs Kyoei E-Acall 50mm lens for reflected UV photography VII

Today a spectrometric test using that previously mentioned Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens, compared to a recently found Kyoei E-Acall f3.5/50mm enlarger lens, as a proof that both actually have a very useful lens transmission, especially in UV.

[click on image to see a larger one]



The Kuribayashi 35mm still reaches deep into UV, even a bit below 320nm and shows a rather high UV at 365nm transmission of over 80%. However the Kyoei E-Acall f3.5/50mm enlarger lens seems to be quite similar, reaches beyond 320nm too and has a tad above 70% UV transmission at 365nm, so another useful addition to the rather short list of UV capable lenses. It has a different blueish coating, compared to the golden coating the 35mm Kuri has, hence suppressing a bit the blue and UV area.

I will test how it performs as a UV taking lens soon, time permitting.

I have written about those lenses before HERE

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Thursday, December 20, 2018

NOVOFLEX T-NOFLEXAR 400mm for reflected ultraviolet (UV) photography


So today it is about a lens I had laying around for many years, intended to use for reflected ultraviolet photography, as it is a simple achromat from what I know, the NOVOFLEX T-NOFLEXAR f5.6/400mm.

To find out if there is a chance to get it to work, best aside from just trying out, to chech with a suitable spectrometer if there is some useful UV transmission - and this will be shown here. As a comparison, I will use two other lenses, both well known to work in UV, the Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm and the NOFLEXAR f3.5/35mm lens (also made by NOVOFLEX).

[click on image to see a larger one]


Now this transmission spectra clearly shows, that although the T-Noflexar 400mm cannot beat the Kuribayashi 35mm lens, it is very close to the Noflexar 35mm lens transmission, which is considered quite useful for reflected UV photography. It delivers about 67% transmission at 365nm, the Kuribayashi however has 78% there.

Remark: the 100% line reflects the transmission of a white SPECTRALON (R) reflection standard with 99% reflection in the 300-700nm region, so this result should be a true representation of the lens transmission.

I will shoot a few test images in visible light and UV, weather permitting. It is dull grey winter weather now, so that might be in coming spring...


I have written about lenses for UV before HERE


Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Monday, May 8, 2017

Petri Kuribayashi 35mm vs Kyoei Acall 80mm lens for reflected UV photography VI

Today a spectrometric test using that previously mentioned Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens, compared to a Kyoei Acall f3.5/80mm lens in M44 thread mount, as a proof that both actually have a very useful lens transmission, especially in UV.

[click on image to see a larger one]



The Kuribayashi 35mm still reaches deeper into UV, even a bit below 320nm and shows a rather high UV at 365nm transmission of over 80%. However the Kyoei Acall f3.5/80mm short tele lens seems to be quite similar, reaches beyond 340nm and has a 70% UV transmission at 365nm, just 10% lower!

I have written about that lens before HERE

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Sunday, February 24, 2013

Steinheil Cassaron 40mm vs Kuribayashi 35mm for reflected UV photography

Here today a comparison between the well known Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens and the lesser known Steinheil Cassron f3.5/40mm lens. I'm using a yellow/red Phalaenopsis flower for that and my "work horse" UV filter, the Baader-U filter plus the deeper reaching Jupiter-U filter. Light source was an UV enhanced Xenon flash. All shots done at f8 and presented on a side-a-side format for easier comparison, left the Cassaron, right the Kuribayashi lens.

[click on image to see a larger one]

Visible light image:
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm, effective peak approx. 375nm):
 

UV image using Jupiter-U filter (approx. 280-385nm, effective peak approx. 365nm):
 

Transmission graph:
 


This comparison shows, that the Kuri 35mm is hard to beat, but the Cassaron does quite well for a simple triplet lens, especially reaching quite deep into UV when the Jupiter-U filter is being used. It has 1.9% focus shift, compared to 1.0% the Kuri 35mm has. A quite useful lens and maybe even easier to find than the Kuri.


Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Thursday, April 6, 2017

Petri Kuribayashi 35mm vs Kyoei Acall 180mm lens for reflected UV photography V

Today a spectrometric test using that previously mentioned Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens, compared to a Kyoei Acall f3.5/180mm lens in M42 thread mount, as a proof that both actually have a very different lens transmission, especially in UV.

[click on image to see a larger one]



The Kuribayashi 35mm reaches much deeper into UV, even a bit below 320nm and shows a rather high UV at 365nm transmission of over 80%. However the Kyoei Acall f3.5/180mm tele lens seems to be a very different beast, as it has no useful at all UV transmission!

I have written about that lens before HERE

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Petri Kuribayashi 35mm vs Kyoei W. Acall 35mm lens for reflected UV photography IV

Today a spectrometric test using that previously mentioned Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens, compared to the W. Acall f3.5/35mm lens in Leica Thread Mount (LTM), as a proof that both actually have a very different lens transmission, especially in UV.

[click on image to see a larger one]



The Kuribayashi 35mm reaches much deeper into UV, even a bit below 320nm and shows a rather high UV at 365nm transmission of over 80%. However the similar looking W. Acall 35mm seems to be a very different beast, as it has at 365nm only approx 5% UV transmission, so basically none useful at all!

I have written about that lens before HERE

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Saturday, July 28, 2012

Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens for reflected UV photography II

Here now a test using that previously mentioned Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens when used with the standard UV transmission filter, the Baader-U as well as my shorter wave Jupiter-U filter, compared to the Noflexar f3.5/35mm lens.

[click on image to see a larger one]



When using the Baader-U filter, the Kuri 35mm has a peak transmission of about 58% at 362nm, wheras the Noflexar 35mm shows one of about 45% at 365nm, that is a gain of about 0.4 stops for the Kuri 35mm.

When using the Jupiter-U filter, the Kuri 35mm has a peak transmission of about 43% at 350nm, wheras the Noflexar 35mm shows one of about 30% at 358nm, that is a gain of about 0.5 stops for the Kuri 35mm, based on its deeper reach into UV.

There is a part III about this lens HERE.

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Wednesday, September 18, 2019

The Bausch & Lomb f4.5 / 9" (229mm) lens for reflected UV II

Quite a few years ago I got an older lens, which was made many years ago by famous lens maker Bausch & Lomb, Rochester NY. It is a golden color coated, heavy and well made f4.5 / 9" (229mm) Phosphor lens which attracted me, since it was made to record images displayed by a P-16 phosphor screen. Nothing special actually, but since P-16 phosphor emits at about max. 380nm, that attracted me most for my UV work.

 

A while ago I tested it against the Coastal Optics Micro Apo 105mm and the Nikon UV Nikkor 105mm and it perfomed very well.

[click on image gets you a larger image]

The spectrometric results in comparison to the Kuribayashi 3.5/35mm lens, one of the best performing "normal" lenses for UV reveals that is very useful for reflected UV:



The B&L lens has a very high UV performance, at 365nm it transmits 74%, whereas the Kuribayashi has 80%, so very close to it. A very useful long focal length lens for reflected UV with quite high UV transmission and reaching rather deep into the UV range for a non quartz fluorite lens.

So and here a few shots I took the other day with it, first the roof of the neighbour house about 20 meters away:


Then a Rudbeckia hirta flower on my balcony from about 4 meters away:

It is indeed a rather sharp lens for reflected UV, which allows a nice working distance, if so needed. A good addition to the rare tools for reflected photography!

I have written HERE more about it.

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Saturday, August 17, 2019

The Bausch & Lomb f4.5 / 9" (229mm) lens for reflected UV

Quite a few years ago I got an older lens, which was made many years ago by famous lens maker Bausch & Lomb, Rochester NY. It is a golden color coated, heavy and well made f4.5 / 9" (229mm) lens which attracted me, since it was made to record images displayed by a P-16 phosphor screen. Nothing special actually, but since P-16 phosphor emits at about max. 380nm, that attracted me most for my UV work.

 

A while ago I tested it against the Coastal Optics Micro Apo 105mm and the Nikon UV Nikkor 105mm and it perfomed very well.

[click on image gets you a larger image]

Today now the spectrometric results in comparison to the Kuribayashi 3.5/35mm lens, one of the best performing "normal" lenses for UV:



It gets pretty clear that the B&L lens has a very high UV performance, at 365nm it transmits 74%, whereas the Kuribayashi has 80%, so very close to it. A very useful long focal length lens for reflected UV.

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Saturday, July 28, 2012

Petri Kuribayashi 35mm vs CERCO quartz fluorite lens for reflected UV photography III

Here now a test using that previously mentioned Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm lens when used with the standard UV transmission filter, the Baader-U as well as my shorter wave Jupiter-U filter, compared to the Noflexar f3.5/35mm lens, but now also in comparison to a quartz fluorite lens, here the CERCO f4.1/94mm.

[click on image to see a larger one]



The CERCO 94mm delivers a peak transmission of about 55% at 350nm when used with the Baader-U filter and about 48% at 338nm when using the Jupiter-U filter. That compared to the Kuri 35mm which has a peak transmission of about 58% at 362nm, wheras the Noflexar 35mm shows one of about 45% at 365nm when teh Baader-U filter is used. And when using the Jupiter-U filter, the Kuri 35mm has a peak transmission of about 43% at 350nm, wheras the Noflexar 35mm shows one of about 30% at 358nm.

So using the very same filters, the CERCO 94mm reaches much deeper into UV, which could have been expected, based on its flat UV transmission. However it is a much more expensive lens and quite hard to find, so the Kuri 35mm certainly is a welcome new find for the aspiring UV shooter, also considering that it virtually has no focus shift between UV and visible light.


Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Friday, July 15, 2016

A simple tutorial for reflected UV photography III (upd November 2019)

- UPDATE November 2019 -

Well, I thought it was about time to go over my "cook book style" tutorial on UV photography again, which I did quite some time ago. I also wrote about the system lens + filter for UV. But meanwhile (2016) things have changed more, even more research has been done, so I thought it would be time for version III. So here it is, all based on my personal experiences, research and, of course, likes.  [last update: 06/2017 about white balancing]

1) get a suitable lens for UV: I made a comprehensive list of lenses tested good for UV here. The EL-Nikkor enlarger lens 5.6/80mm and 5.6/105mm (both ONLY the earlier black/chrome version!) have proven to not only have the highest UV transmission, but also to be virtually free of focus shift. Those two and all enlarger lenses without focusing ability additionally need a focusing helicoid. Alternatively get the Novoflex Noflexar 3.5/35mm lens which also has a very high UV transmission, is virtually free of focus shift and allows close-up shots up to 1:2 (0.5x) without additional tubes or helicoids. Both lenses are ($)$$, easy to find and may be suitably mounted to achieve infinity focus. If you need an even higher transmitting, yet rather affordable but a bit rare lens, get the original KURIBAYASHI or KYOEI 3.5/35mm lens. If you need a wide angle lens, that's a bit more difficult, but there are some. Still the best and the "industry and scientific standard UV lens" is the discontinued Nikon UV Nikkor 4.5/105mm, or the mechanical + optical identical, still available from stock Tochigi Nikon UV 4.5/105mm  (also sold as RAYFACT UV 4.5/105mm). Also still available from stock are the JENOPTIK Coastal Optics 4/105mm UV-Micro Apo and 4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo Macro (both unfortunately having some hotspot +ü mechanical issues) but all those four quartz flourite lenses are a quite costly in the higher $$$$ range, but are a true investment and only fit Nikon cameras directly, but other acemars with easy to find (ONLY lensless!!) adapters. [upd 11/2019]

2) get a suitable filter: The 2" Baader U-filter still today is the best filter you can get, better than 80% and 325...395nm transmission band, IR excellently suppressed below 1.0exp-3 (OD3), which is important for most DSLRs due to their high IR and low UV sensitivity, especially if your camera has the internal filter removed. Be prepared to expose 8-10 stops more (newer cameras 6-8 stops) than normal. My usual setting on an sunny to overcast day is 2...4" @ f8-11 ISO200 using an older type Nikon D70 or converted D200 but 1/2-1/4" @ f8-11 ISO400 on a converted Panasonic Lumix mft camera. Modern converted cameras have lifeview for UV, which also works considerably well in A-mode and using those purely manual lenses. Best is to have that filter built into a filter slider (from astro shops, unfortunately not for lenses with rotating front) or a Nikon AF-1 gel filter holder, which needs a 60mm (male) - 48mm(female) and 48mm (male) - 52mm (female) step ring to mount the filter inside and also allows to mount a 52mm sunshade outside. That contraption allows to flip down the filter, adjust focus, take a VIS shot if needed for comparison studies, flip up and take a UV shot. Magnetic filter holding ring sets (manfrotto XUME) are a rather new development, which works very well and saves quite some time (I only use those now). But also screwing in and out of the UV filter works reasonably well, if done with care. Should you have a full spectrum converted camera (with clear fused silica filter inside), an external filter which compensates that is needed, so as to be able to shoot normal visible photos with it (as before the conversion). I recommend to use an external 2mm thick SCHOTT S8612, SCHOTT BG40 or SCHOTT BG39 or  Schott BG38 (in that sequence of usefulness) for that purpose and adjust white balance accordingly. Some companies offer such "compensating filters", but basically it is just the filter glass I have mentioned. Cheap UV filter glass from China is being curretly offered, it quality is not great, has streaks in the glass and transmission overall is not as good as SCHOTT or HOYA glass, so personally I stay away from those. For beginners SCHOTT UG11 / HOYA U340 in 2mm thickness stacked with SCHOTT BG40 in 2mm works rather well with approx 60% peak transmission @350nm as a cheaper alternative. Remember to demand from any UV transmitting filter an IR suppression of at least OD3, but better OD4! [upd 11/2019]

3) get a suitable UV enabled camera: My finding is that today converted mft (micro four third) or Sony NEX cameras are so far the best cameras for UV and allow a plentitude of lenses using suitable cheaply available adapters. Their short register length (around 20mm) allow to use many lenses which a DSLR cannot use. Still the older type Nikon D70(s) is the best value for money for UV as is the D40, since both work off the shelf unmodified. D80 and D200 work well either as well as teh modern D800/810 ones, [these are older camera types , not recommended anymore] but all need the internal filter exchanged against a clear fused silica filter first  (use a professional service for that: maxmax and lifepixel in the US. The Nikon D7000 (and other modern Nikon cameras) has turned out to be a very useful camera for UV, but needs a converting company, that can deal with the internal IR leakage caused by Nikon's IR shutter monitor (I have reported about that here in detail). CANON shooters - it does not work well with older Canon DSLRs, their filters and CMOS chips do not allow to record UV in an acceptable manner (see the test I have published here; extremely long exposure, high ISO, noisy results), but the newer types, due to different sensor seem to work quite well - I have no personal experience with that.There are also monochrome converted Nikon + Canon cameras (with Bayer pattern removed), with an astonishing 6-8 stops higher sensitivity, but the results are of course monochrome images only. [upd 11/2019]

4) get a suitable UV light source: the sun is of course the best, but not always available. Xenon flashes come next as they have a very similar spectrum than the sun has. Most need the front filters removed, some even need the golden UV suppressing coating on the Xenon tube partially (leave a bit on the back or it does not ignite anymore!!) polished off (using fine Cerium oxide powder) or erased using HCL acid (dangerous!!). A well known candidate is the good and cheap Vivitar 285HV flash (use 2 or 3 if needed), as it already has a clear tube and a low trigger voltage which is safe for modern DSLRs. Another one would be the stronger Nikon SB-14 hammer head flash, but here the tube needs polishing for higher UV output. Another alternative are modern UV LEDs, built into LED flashlights, here especially the Nichia 365nm types (the modern Nichia equipped CONVOY S2 is one of the cheapest around $20-30 and are rather small and good). These are available nowadays easily (ebay, amazon etc.), so are easy to use and not that expensive anymore. There are even some with UV filter glass in front, to suppress any visible light leaking (good for UV induced visible fluorescence!). Stay away from other cheap Chinese UV torches, not really worth the money and the claimed tech. data often do not hold. There are also more advanced systems available of course, which even use the most recent 4 dice high power UV LEDs but those (actually all those UV LED torches) are quite dangerous to the naked eye and should only be used be experienced users and ALWAYS USE EYE PROTECTING UV GOGGLES when working with those. Ethically I find it unacceptable to use with living beings even insects etc. as they get blind. [upd 11/2019]

5) get a suitable white balacing disc: to be able to do a custom white balance for your filter/lens/camera combination, see http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.de/2017/06/white-balancing-options-spectralon-r.html as your images without that will come out rather red or violet depending on camera and sensor used. This is needed to be done for EVERY lens + filter combination (and also basically for every changed lighting situation, but not as critical and lens+filter)! Ideally then stored as a preset within your camera and written down to remember.A simpler and cheaper solution is to use VIRGIN WHITE TEFLON for white balancing which is nearly as good. Be reminded to wash all of them with Ethanol and rinse with purified water and let dry on air AND DO NOT TOUCH THEM ANYMORE except on the rim as fingerprints leave nasty invisible UV marks which would falsify the white balancing result [upd 11/2019]

6) get a sturdy tripod: you need usually at least 1/2-1/4" / 2...4" exposure time (depending on camera used) in full sun outside, sometimes even longer, which calls for a sturdy setup on a tripod. UV is strongest 90 degrees to the sun where the sky is the bluest; avoid to shoot in bright midday sun, due to high IR content present (although no longer a big problem with the new Baader 2" U-Filter, but still IR leakage may happen in rare cases). Using Xenon flash brings exposure time down to 1/200, but the flash needs to be strong and quite close to the subject, which is not always doable and with living beings I find it ethically unacceptable (as well as using strong UV LED lights for that). A few flashes wilts a flower quickly, so imagine what it does to an animal or insect eye.

7) get a suitable shooting habit: for comparison shots I shoot visual light first and then switch to UV filter and shoot UV with exactly the same framing. Be careful not to move the camera. Should you be using using an older lens which most likely has focus shift, focus closer. This needs to be tested out, my finding is that the f8...f11 position on the DOF scale works best (similar to an IR mark on some lenses) but could also calibrated for that lens (like a IR mark but for UV). Shoot RAW files or high resolution JPEGs. Some Pro's do RAW (I usually don't), but for first tests JPEG will do. Set camera white balance to 2500 degrees Kelvin to avoid a blown red channel (Nikon only) or use UNI white balance.

8) get the results processed: Upload pictures to your PC and process them. They will look very red or violet / magenta (if using Nikon DSLRs, other DSLRS produce blue or magenta looking results), but what you see is UV, depending on camera (and only if a good UV filter with no IR leakage has been used, like the Baader-U) . Then either you process them to black/white or white balance them using a Teflon disc or (rather expensive) SPECTRALON (R) target. Then adjust to taste. UV has no "color" by definition, so you may set what you prefer. I have been using BibblePro  its "click white" operation and the built in denoisifier. Others are more happy to use Nikon NX-D. Today I use Capture One Pro.

9) get help and discuss results: exchange and discuss your results on one of the few UV forums on the net: UltravioletPhotography.com ,  nikonians.com, nikoncafe.com and openphotographyforums.com. Quite a bit of my old content resides on the Nikon-only forum  nikongear.com.

This is in condensed form the result of some years of research and testing and of course only reflects my personal opinion as of 2016 (upd. 2019) - others may think differently. No warranty given or implied for all being mentioned here and you take full responsibility for all you do with that. If you need some rare equipment, let me know, I may be able to help. I have plenty of filters, lenses etc. available for sale, or may be able to direct to a source. I also do engineering and photographic consultation on a professional basis about any UV related subject.


All my works shown here on my BLOG, my pbase.com site or my macrolenses.de site carry my copyright, so if you like to use any of my graphs or any of my pictures, please do ask me for my explicit permission first.

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Sunday, May 3, 2020

Surprising STEINHEIL f2.8/50mm lens for reflected UV photography III

I had mentioned in my previous thread, that a few years ago I got an older lens, which was made decades ago by famous lens maker STEINHEIL . It is a possibly single coated, well made 2.8/50mm lens which attracted me, since it showed some seemingly good UV transmission when shining an 365nm UV LED beam through it. The surprise came when I had it under my spectrometer, revealing its high and deep reaching UV transmission, no other normal lens so far showed. But some outdoor images taken with it revealed, that it cannot be used fully open at f2.8 due to lacking sharpness and definition. So here now some indoor shots done in a controlled environment, using a modified Xenon flash for high UV output.

[click on image gets you a larger image]

VIS image using UV/IR Cut filter:
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm) at f4:
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm) at f5.6:
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm) at f8:
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm) at f11:
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm) at f16:
 

VIS and UV image side-by-side both at f8:
 

As I had mentioned before, it got pretty clear that this lens has a very high UV performance, at 365nm it transmits around 75%, very close to the Kuribayashi 35mm which has 80%. Its peak transmission with Baader-U filter attached is around 68% at 360nm.

At f2.8 however the resulting images did not look as sharp as wished for, but stopping down has improved sharpness significantly, especially in reflected UV light, which by its shorter wavelength in theory resolves approx. 1.6x more. It gets quite obvious, that this lens is a clearly excellent and very useful lens for reflected UV at optimal f8/f11, especially since the image size deviation between visible and UV image is a bare 1.3% only.

I will in the next thread show the deep(er) UV performance of this lens...

I have written more about this lens HERE.

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Surprising STEINHEIL f2.8/50mm lens for reflected UV photography I

Quite a few years ago I got an older lens, which was made many years ago by famous lens maker STEINHEIL. It is a possibly single coated, well made 2.8/50mm lens which attracted me, since it showed some seemingly good UV transmission when shining an 365nm UV LED through it. The surprise came when I had it under my spectrometer, revealing its high and deep reaching UV transmission, no other normal lens so far showed.

[click on image gets you a larger image]

Today now the spectrometric results as one of the best performing "normal" lenses for UV, slso showing the transmissing with the Baader-U filter, as well as a 290-340nm filter:



It gets pretty clear that this lens has a very high UV performance, at 365nm it transmits around 75%, very close to the Kuribayashi 35mm which has 80%. Its peak transmission with Baader-U filter attached is around 68% around 360nm. Using that deeper 290-340nm UV filter which peaks at 334nm with 68% transmission, it still has a 32% total transmission at its peak at 338nm.

 A very useful lens for reflected UV this seems to be, but photographic tests still needs to be done...

I have written about this lens more HERE.

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

35mm BESLAR enlarger lens for reflected UV photography

Today again about a simple, but as it turned out, quite UV capable BESLAR f3.5/35mm enlarger lens. I have done a similar enlarger lens comparison for a 100mm lens here and here and a comparison for 50mm lenses previously here. I'm using a yellow/red Phalaenopsis flower for that and my "work horse" UV filter, the Baader-U filter plus the deeper reaching Jupiter-U filter. Light source was an UV enhanced Xenon flash. All shots were done at f8 and are presented in a side-a-side format for easier comparison.

[click on image to see a larger one]

Images showing on the left a visible light image and on the right using the Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm, effective peak approx. 375nm):
 

UV images using shown on the left the Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm, effective peak approx. 375nm) and on the right my Jupiter-U filter (approx. 280-385nm, effective peak approx. 365nm):
 

UV detail images using shown on the left the Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm, effective peak approx. 375nm) and on the right my Jupiter-U filter (approx. 280-385nm, effective peak approx. 365nm):
 

Transmission graph:
 

Well, this little enlarger lens performs acceptably well, seemingly has quite a high UV transmission of about 80% and quite a deep reach into the UV region to about 320nm (white line), compared to my new standard 35mm lens (green line), the Kuribayashi 35mm. I also tested a rebadged version under a different moniker (pink line) which seems to perform about identical.


Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Tuesday, October 27, 2020

A simple tutorial for reflected UV photography IV (upd October 2020)

- UPDATE October 2020 -

Well, I thought it was about time to go over my "cook book style" tutorial on UV photography again, which I did quite some time ago. I also wrote about the system lens + filter for UV. But meanwhile (2020) things have changed more, even more research has been done, so I thought it would be time for version IV. So here it is, all based on my personal experiences, research and, of course, likes.  [last previous update was: 06/2017 about white balancing]

1) get a suitable lens for UV: I made a comprehensive list of lenses tested good for UV here. The truly excellent  EL-Nikkor enlarger lens 5.6/80mm and 5.6/105mm (both ONLY the earlier black/chrome version!) have proven to not only have the highest UV transmission, but also to be virtually free of focus shift. Those two and all enlarger lenses without focusing ability additionally need a focusing helicoid. Alternatively get the Novoflex Noflexar 3.5/35mm lens which also has a very high UV transmission, is virtually free of focus shift and allows close-up shots up to 1:2 (0.5x) without additional tubes or helicoids. Both lenses are ($)$$, easy to find and may be suitably mounted to achieve infinity focus. If you need an even higher transmitting, yet rather affordable (unfortunately prices have gone up) but a bit rare lens, get the original KURIBAYASHI or KYOEI 3.5/35mm lens. If you need a true wide angle lens, that's a bit more difficult, but there are some. Still the best and the "industry and scientific standard UV lens" is the discontinued Nikon UV Nikkor 4.5/105mm, or the mechanical + optical identical, still available from stock Tochigi Nikon UV 4.5/105mm  (also sold as RAYFACT UV 4.5/105mm). Also still available from stock are the JENOPTIK Coastal Optics 4/105mm UV-Micro Apo and 4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo Macro (both unfortunately having some hotspot + mechanical issues) but all those four quartz flourite lenses are a quite costly in the higher $$$$ range, but are a true investment and only fit Nikon cameras directly, but other cameras with easy to find (ONLY lensless!!) adapters. The new mirrorless Nikon Z and Canon EOS M cameras have much shorter register lengths (flange focal distance of 16mm resp. 18mm), now allowing lenses not useable before! And then there are the FF cameras of the L-Mount Alliance (Leica, Panasonic, Sigma) with 18mm resgister. [upd 10/2020]

2) get a suitable filter: The 2" Baader U-filter still today is the best filter you can get, better than 80% and 325...395nm transmission band, IR excellently suppressed below 1.0exp-3 (OD3), which is important for most DSLRs due to their high IR and low UV sensitivity, especially if your camera has the internal filter removed. Be prepared to expose 8-10 stops more (newer cameras 6-8 stops) than normal. My usual setting on an sunny to overcast day is 2...4" @ f8-11 ISO200 using an older type Nikon D70 or converted D200 but 1/2-1/4" @ f8-11 ISO400 on a converted Panasonic Lumix mft camera. Modern converted cameras have lifeview for UV, which also works considerably well in A-mode and using those purely manual lenses. Best is to have that filter built into a filter slider (from astro shops, unfortunately not for lenses with rotating front) or a Nikon AF-1 gel filter holder, which needs a 60mm (male) - 48mm(female) and 48mm (male) - 52mm (female) step ring to mount the filter inside and also allows to mount a 52mm sunshade outside. That contraption allows to flip down the filter, adjust focus, take a VIS shot if needed for comparison studies, flip up and take a UV shot. Magnetic filter holding ring sets (Manfrotto XUME) are a rather new development, which works very well and saves quite some time (I only use those now). But also screwing in and out of the UV filter works reasonably well, if done with care. Should you have a full spectrum converted camera (with clear fused silica filter/window inside), an external filter which compensates that is needed, so as to be able to shoot normal visible photos with it (as before the conversion). I recommend to use an external 2mm thick SCHOTT S8612, SCHOTT BG40 or SCHOTT BG39 or  Schott BG38 (in that sequence of usefulness) for that purpose and adjust white balance accordingly. Some companies offer such "compensating filters", but basically it is just the filter glass I have mentioned. Cheap UV filter glass from China is being curretly offered, it quality is not great, has streaks in the glass and transmission overall is not as good as SCHOTT or HOYA glass, so personally I stay away from those. For beginners SCHOTT UG11 / HOYA U340 in 2mm thickness stacked with SCHOTT BG40 in 2mm works rather well with approx 60% peak transmission @350nm as a cheaper alternative. Remember to demand from any UV transmitting filter an IR suppression of at least OD3, but better OD4! And btw. DO USE A SUITABLE SUNSHADE in front of the filters (attach also using magnetic adapter rings!) as this increases contrast oftne dramatically and reduces flare! [upd 10/2020]

3) get a suitable UV enabled camera: My finding is that today converted mft (micro four third) or Sony NEX cameras are so far the best cameras for UV and allow a plentitude of lenses using suitable cheaply available adapters. Their short register length (around 20mm) allow to use many lenses which a DSLR cannot use. Still the older type Nikon D70(s) is the best value for money for UV as is the D40, since both work off the shelf unmodified. D80 and D200 work well either as well as teh modern D800/810 ones, [these are older camera types , not recommended anymore] but all need the internal filter exchanged against a clear fused silica filter first  (use a professional service for that: maxmax and lifepixel in the US. The Nikon D7000 (and other modern Nikon cameras) has turned out to be a very useful camera for UV, but needs a converting company, that can deal with the internal IR leakage caused by Nikon's IR shutter monitor (I have reported about that here in detail). CANON shooters - it does not work well with older Canon DSLRs, their filters and CMOS chips do not allow to record UV in an acceptable manner (see the test I have published here; extremely long exposure, high ISO, noisy results), but the newer types, due to different sensor seem to work quite well - I have no personal experience with that.There are also monochrome converted Nikon + Canon cameras (with Bayer pattern removed), with an astonishing 6-8 stops higher sensitivity, but the results are of course monochrome images only. Now in 2020 there are even more and better choices, being the mirrorless Nikon Z-series and the Canon EOS M series, as well as the FF L-Mount Alliance (Leica, Panasonic, Sigma [upd 10/2020]

4) get a suitable UV light source: the sun is of course the best, but not always available. Xenon flashes come next as they have a very similar spectrum than the sun has. Most need the front filters removed, some even need the golden UV suppressing coating on the Xenon tube partially (leave a bit on the back or it does not ignite anymore!!) polished off (using fine Cerium oxide powder) or erased using HCL acid (dangerous!!). A well known candidate is the good and cheap Vivitar 285HV flash (use 2 or 3 if needed), as it already has a clear tube and a low trigger voltage which is safe for modern DSLRs. Another one would be the stronger Nikon SB-14 hammer head flash, but here the tube needs polishing for higher UV output. Another alternative are modern UV LEDs, built into LED flashlights, here especially the Nichia 365nm types (the modern Nichia equipped CONVOY S2 is one of the cheapest around $20-30 and are rather small, strong and good). These are available nowadays easily (ebay, amazon etc.), so are easy to use and not that expensive anymore. There are even some with UV filter glass in front, to suppress any visible light leaking (good for UV induced visible fluorescence!). Stay away from other cheap Chinese UV torches, not really worth the money and the claimed tech. data often do not hold. There are also more advanced systems available of course, which even use the most recent 4 dice high power UV LEDs but those (actually all those UV LED torches) are quite dangerous to the naked eye and should only be used be experienced users and ALWAYS USE EYE PROTECTING UV GOGGLES when working with those. Ethically I find it unacceptable to use strong UV LED torches aimed at living beings, even insects etc. as they get blind. [upd 11/2019]

5) get a suitable white balancing disc: to be able to do a custom white balance for your filter/lens/camera combination, see http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.de/2017/06/white-balancing-options-spectralon-r.html as your images without that will come out rather red or violet depending on camera and sensor used. This is needed to be done for EVERY lens + filter combination (and also basically for every changed lighting situation, but not as critical as lens+filter)! Ideally then stored as a preset within your camera and written down to remember. A simpler and cheaper solution is to use VIRGIN WHITE TEFLON for white balancing which is nearly as good. Be reminded to wash all of them with Ethanol, then rinse with purified water and let dry on air AND DO NOT TOUCH THEM ANYMORE except on the rim, as fingerprints leave nasty invisible UV marks which would falsify the white balancing result. SHOULD THIS EVER HAPPEN, repeat the cleaning process above and if this does not work (test by taking an UV image) then SAND IT DOWN with some fine sanding paper (400 grit in Europe) and repeat the cleansing process mentioned above. [upd 10/2020]

6) get a sturdy tripod: you need usually at least 1/2-1/4" / 2...4" [this has reduced considerably using higher but noiseless ISO enabled cameras] exposure time (depending on camera used) in full sun outside, sometimes even longer, which calls for a sturdy setup on a tripod. UV is strongest 90 degrees to the sun where the sky is the bluest; avoid to shoot in bright midday sun, due to high IR content present (although no longer a big problem with the new Baader 2" U-Filter, but still IR leakage may happen in rare cases). Using Xenon flash brings exposure time down to 1/200, but the flash needs to be strong and quite close to the subject, which is not always doable and with living beings I find it ethically unacceptable (as well as using strong UV LED lights for that). A few flashes wilts a flower quickly, so imagine what it does to an animal or insect eye.

7) get a suitable shooting habit: for comparison shots I shoot visual light first and then switch to UV filter and shoot UV with exactly the same framing. Be careful not to move the camera. Should you be using using an older lens which most likely has focus shift, focus closer. This needs to be tested out, my finding is that the f8...f11 position on the DOF scale works best (similar to an IR mark on some lenses) but could also calibrated for that lens (like a IR mark but for UV). Shoot RAW files or high resolution JPEGs. Some Pro's do RAW (I usually don't), but for first tests JPEG will do. Set camera white balance to 2500 degrees Kelvin to avoid a blown red channel (Nikon only) or use UNI white balance.

8) get the results processed: Upload pictures to your PC and process them. They will look very red or violet / magenta (if using Nikon DSLRs, other DSLRS produce blue or magenta looking results), but what you see is UV, depending on camera (and only if a good UV filter with no IR leakage has been used, like the Baader-U) . Then either you process them to black/white or white balance them using a Virgin White Teflon disc or a (rather expensive) SPECTRALON (R) target. Then adjust to taste. UV has no "color" by definition, so you may set what you prefer. I have been using BibblePro  its "click white" operation and the built in denoisifier. Others are more happy to use Nikon NX-D. Today I use Capture One Pro.

9) get help and discuss results: exchange and discuss your results on one of the few UV forums on the net: UltravioletPhotography.com ,  nikonians.com, nikoncafe.com and openphotographyforums.com. Quite a bit of my old content resides on the Nikon-only forum  nikongear.com.

This is in condensed form the result of some years of research and testing and of course only reflects my personal opinion as of 2020 - others may think differently. No warranty given or implied for all being mentioned here, and YOU TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY WHAT YOU DO with that. 

If you need some rare equipment, let me know, I may be able to help. I have plenty of filters, lenses etc. available for sale, or may be able to direct to a source. 

I also do engineering and photographic consultation on a professional basis about any UV related subject.


All my works shown here on my BLOG, my pbase.com site or my macrolenses.de site carry my copyright, so if you like to use any of my graphs or any of my pictures, please do ask me for my explicit permission first.

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Sunday, May 3, 2020

Surprising STEINHEIL f2.8/50mm lens for reflected UV photography II

I had previously mentioned that a few years ago I got an older lens, which was made decades ago by famous lens maker STEINHEIL. It is a possibly single coated, well made 2.8/50mm lens which attracted me, since it showed some seemingly good UV transmission when shining an 365nm UV LED through it. The surprise came when I had it in my spectrometer, revealing its high and deep reaching UV transmission, no other normal lens so far showed. Now some outdoor images taken with it, all at f2.8 to see if that lens speed could be used. Light was overcast sunlight.

[click on image gets you a larger image]

VIS image using UV/IR Cut filter:
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm):
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm) and 340nm shortpass filter stacked:
 

VIS image using UV/IR Cut filter:
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm):
 

UV image using Baader-U filter (approx. 320-395nm) and 340nm shortpass filter stacked:
 

It got pretty clear that this lens has a very high UV performance, at 365nm it transmits around 75%, very close to the Kuribayashi 35mm which has 80%. Its peak transmission with Baader-U filter attached is around 68% at 360nm. Using that deeper 290-340nm UV filter which peaks at 334nm with 68% transmissing, it still has a 32% total transmission at its peak at 338nm.

At f2.8 however the resulting images do not look as sharp as wished for, so another test will have to reveal if stopping down will improve sharpness considerably.

I have written about this lens more HERE.

Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos

Saturday, January 29, 2011

[UV] Lenses tested good for UV

This is simply a collection of links to tests I have done for various lenses in terms of UV transmission and UV focus shift. Some also contain IR tests. No specific order and no ranking implied. Only lenses tested I own; if one seems to miss, I simply don't have it.

• True Lenses for UV: UV-Nikkor 105mm, Coastal Optics 105mm
• Lens Comparison: UV Nikkor 105mm, COSI 105mm, B&L 9"
• Carl Zeiss UV-Planar 4/60mm
• Schneider Componon lenses for UV
• Rodenstock (now LINOS) Rodagon lenses for UV
• Steinheil lenses for UV
• EL-Nikkor enlarger lenses for UV
• EL-Nikkor 3.5/63mm vs 5.6/80mm
• EL-Nikkor 75mm - 80mm - 105mm for UV?
• On EL Nikkors for UV Photography and a Myth
• EL-Nikkor 5.6/80mm lens without UV + IR focus shift
• EL-Nikkor 80mm vs 105mm UV and VIS comparison
• EL-Nikkor 80mm - old vs new
• Micro-Nikkor 105mm for UV photography? Not...
• Novoflex Noflexar 35mm vs EL-Nikkor 80mm UV - VIS comparison
• Wide angle lenses for UV
• Eight 35mm wide angle lenses tested for UV
• Petri Kuribayashi f3.5/35mm for reflected UV
• A comparative, subjective shootout of lenses for reflected UV photography
• A comparative, subjective shootout of Lenses for UV Photography ... Fluorescence
• Rudbeckia - a study of lenses for UV photography
• Transmittance of some Bellows Lens Heads
• Old Achromatic Quartz Fluorite Lens for Ultraviolet Photography
• Old Achromatic Quartz Fluorite Lens for Ultraviolet Photography (ff.)
• Hamamatsu A4869 UV lens f3.5/50mm for reflected UV photography
 
Stay tuned, more will follow on that fascinating subject...

More info on this very interesting field may be found on my site http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos