View Full Version : Schneider TRUE-CUT IR-750
dpryke
04-12-2009, 04:31 PM
Has anyone purchased and used this filter to correct the dreaded IR problem.
I just purchased my EX3 and ran some lighting tests last week, and sure enough there was the problem. The funny thing is it shows up on people's shirt, but it didn't show up on the duvateen black fabric I use for table top shoots. I guess it really depends on the fabric.
Thanks
asafb
04-12-2009, 04:37 PM
Hi dpryke, please read my thread which i start months ago "IR cost thousands" - there's 12 pages of people commenting on this issue. I am hoping an EX1/3 owner would do a class-action lawsuit against Sony, demanding they fix this problem by recalling the cameras, fixing the cameras, and sending all back to the rental houses and owners.
Thanks,
AB
asafb
04-12-2009, 04:38 PM
I'm not sure if you own this camera or rented it, but avoid it for these types of situations - you will get UGLY browns. Go witha Sony V1U or Canon XL-H1 which do NOT have this IR problem.
dpryke
04-12-2009, 05:24 PM
What's the big deal. It's a problem that needs a filter to correct. Would I rather it not be a problem, of course. However, I have been shooting for over 20 years and I have had to do all kinds of stuff to video cameras to make them look better. It's the nature of the beast. This has been a problem since CCD's, and then CMOS chips came to market. Your spending $6000 to $8000 on a camera what's $200 for a filter. The Red One is an amazing ($20,000) camera, and it has the same issues.
As for the V1U, it is an incredibly slow HDV (not HD) camera, and Canon for some reason hasn't discovered progressive chips yet. Plus they both have what I consider to be the biggest drawback, tapeheads. After all my years of shooting and replacing heads, I am a huge advocate of tapeless recording.
chagchag
04-12-2009, 08:10 PM
What's the big deal. It's a problem that needs a filter to correct. Would I rather it not be a problem, of course. However, I have been shooting for over 20 years and I have had to do all kinds of stuff to video cameras to make them look better. It's the nature of the beast. This has been a problem since CCD's, and then CMOS chips came to market. Your spending $6000 to $8000 on a camera what's $200 for a filter. The Red One is an amazing ($20,000) camera, and it has the same issues.
As for the V1U, it is an incredibly slow HDV (not HD) camera, and Canon for some reason hasn't discovered progressive chips yet. Plus they both have what I consider to be the biggest drawback, tapeheads. After all my years of shooting and replacing heads, I am a huge advocate of tapeless recording.
Very well put!
nsoltz
04-12-2009, 08:25 PM
Has anyone purchased and used this filter to correct the dreaded IR problem.
I just purchased my EX3 and ran some lighting tests last week, and sure enough there was the problem. The funny thing is it shows up on people's shirt, but it didn't show up on the duvateen black fabric I use for table top shoots. I guess it really depends on the fabric.
Thanks
You really should be using the 486 or the 680. The 750 was Schneider's initial answer and I had the opportunity to test it. The 750 really made little difference. The 486 does make a difference and Schneider will soon be touting the 680. Per Ryan Avery at Schneider, there is very little difference between the 486 and 680 as far as the EX goes.
Putting a V1U or XL-H1 in the same category as the EX? Absurd.
Ned Soltz
Jolfer
04-12-2009, 08:38 PM
I get those issues alot, especially since I'm shooting a fashion product show, and black is the main color people use. I have to just either correct it in post, or go through some lighting adjustments.
Where is this filter? Or what is this filter you guys speak of?
dpryke
04-13-2009, 06:30 AM
Hi Ned,
Thanks for the info. I think I will call Schneider today and ask for an opinion.
Do you leave the filter on the camera all the time. I am trying to decide whether I purchase a 77mm and leave it on the camera, or a 4x4 for my matte box.
Dave
Armstrongfilms
04-13-2009, 08:42 AM
I wonder if the 77mm Slim b+w one could stay on the EX-1 lens with a 35mm adapter rig in front of it? seems like you might need to zoom in a few more points to get framing, but i wonder if anyone has tried this "behind the lens" fix, which, since its a filter that can stay on all the time, would allow for seperate filtration in front of the lens. the effectiveness of this would clearly need to be tested, but it seems possible.
dpryke
04-13-2009, 11:55 AM
Well, I just got off the phone with Schneider Optics, and they recommend the B&W 486 UV/IR filter. The 750 is for the Red camera, the 486 is for the EX. According to Schneider, they have been doing a lot of research on the best filter for each camera, with data coming in from people like us. They also told me that there is no green edge problem with the stock lens. It only happens on lenses with a field of view greater than 60 degrees, like a wide angle.
nsoltz
04-13-2009, 01:24 PM
Glad you got Schneider and they confirmed my 486 statement. I have been keeping on the lens at all times. Just had a shoot today where one of the talent was wearing a black suit. Reviewed the footage and his suit is absolutely black. I was shooting under Tungsten and it definitely would ahve been a muddy-brown without the filter.
Ned
... They also told me that there is no green edge problem with the stock lens. It only happens on lenses with a field of view greater than 60 degrees, like a wide angle.
I am a bit suprised about this statement as I have seen samples of the green tinting and while the users state it was when shooting wide, I can't ever remember anyone saying it was with anything but the stock lens alone.
The Sony wide angle doesn't even have a filter thread so you couldn't put the 486 on the wide angle lens (which is fundemental to the real problem at hand).
I have a feeling the person you spoke too is mistaken.
robbz
04-13-2009, 04:41 PM
Does the B&W 486 come in a 4x5.65 sizing? Maybe they had it in front of the WA in a matte box?
dpryke
04-13-2009, 06:51 PM
Hi Guy,
The person I spoke with was also relaying info from another person in the office with him. I don't think he meant to say the filter was on the wide angle, more like the filter was on the stock lens and the wide angle on that. The person seemed willing to help. I don't think he had any reason to BS me. In fact he brought up the green edge issue, not me. However, he did not know what mm the lens would be at to get the green edge, just the 60 degree field of view.
Ned seems to be using the filter with no problems at all. Ned, did you get the regular filter or the slim one? There is a big price difference between the two.
nsoltz
04-13-2009, 07:47 PM
I've got the slim version. No green vingette issue in today's shoot, but I could not shoot fully wide owing to an unfortunate window position.
I didn't mean to say they were deliberatly missleading you, just they probably got a few facts messed up.
These filters are not meant to go behind anything, be it another filter or a wide angle adaptor. Something about internal reflections.
The green tint is not visible in many situations as it can get lost in the footage, but on a simple background, say a white wall, at the lens wide setting, it was visible.
If that is as good as it gets then so be it, but I'd like to hear from the likes of Schneider wether they think they can improve on this filter, and if they can, are they actually doing it (ie is there anything worth waiting for & what time frame?)
I've got the slim version. No green vingette issue in today's shoot, but I could not shoot fully wide owing to an unfortunate window position.
What's the difference between the slim & standard version (other than cost). OK, I know it is slimmer, but why would you buy one over the other?
Armstrongfilms
04-13-2009, 09:39 PM
OK, I know it is slimmer, but why would you buy one over the other?
since its a "stay on" filter, its good to get the slim one so you can, if you need to, stack multiple filters on the IR cut, and maintain the wide end of the lens without vingenette
dpryke
04-14-2009, 04:26 AM
How can you stack filters? I thought a slim filter has no filter thead other than the one to attach it to the camera. That's how the make it slim.
Armstrongfilms
04-14-2009, 07:25 AM
How can you stack filters? I thought a slim filter has no filter thead other than the one to attach it to the camera. That's how the make it slim.
interesting.....every single Tiffen slim filter i own has front threads. polarizer/uv/80a/85b/nd grad......all "slim" all with threads....some of the "slim" filters actually offset the glass just a bit to allow an extra turn on a stacked filter. i have to say, though, i do not own any schneider or b+w slim filters, only 4x4 and normal ones, so i cant speak for them.
asafb
04-14-2009, 11:26 AM
How about getting an HPX300 :)
Barry_Green
04-14-2009, 12:22 PM
That's about as useful as when people write in and say "get a mac."
True that the 300 doesn't have the IR problem, but it does have more skew than the EX1 in 1080/24p, so it's not necessarily a direct substitution... and besides, sometimes people have already bought and they're trying to make their system work with what they've got.
So let the folks who want to talk about IR filters, do so in peace, please.
dpryke
04-14-2009, 04:12 PM
Thanks Barry....
It looks as if the 486 filter is the best option right now. Not a perfect one, but the best.
I was thinking of something during an interview today. What is it about flos that don't seem to cause the IR problem. I was running a test with tungsten light and got the problem. I turned on the overhead flos, got a new white balance and the blacks were fine. Do the blacks have the same IR effect using a Kinoflo instead of tungsten. I know both can have the same color temp, but what is it about the flos that was OK. It can't be a color temp thing if people are having the problem in bright sunlight. It seems that there is no consistency to the problem. I also was wondering if you put a plus green on tungsten (like to balance to flos) would that have an effect. What is it about the fabric. I shot my tripod bag, duveteen, and a shirt. The duveteen was fine but the others were brown.
Just a flow of thoughts...
:)
Barry_Green
04-14-2009, 04:22 PM
The IR problem is because the sensor is sensitive to infrared light. Daylight typically doesn't have much infrared, it's a lot heavier in UV (remember the color spectrum, red-orange-yellow-green-blue-violet). Infrared is off the visible spectrum on the red side, UV is off the visible spectrum on the blue side.
Fluos don't put out much IR, typically. HMIs don't put out much IR. But tungsten, being a reddish light, is heavy on the IR.
IR is more heat energy than light energy, and tungsten spews out more of its energy in heat than any other light source, so there's tons of IR.
So it's not the fabric that's the problem, necessarily... it's the dyes in the fabric that's bouncing the IR back at the camera. Some fabrics absorb it, some reflect it. If it's absorbed (like your duvetyne) then there's no problem. But if it's reflected back to the camera, that's when you might run into a problem. Some cameras (like the Sony V1U and the HPX300) have IR filtration that blocks all the IR, so it doesn't matter what kind of fabrics you use etc., the camera is immune to IR. But some (like the Red and EX1 and VariCam) have quite a bit of sensitivity to IR, so when you use a fabric that reflects IR, the camera sees the infrared as a reddish pollution to the blacks.
The Tru-Cut and hot mirror and other IR filters are an attempt to supplement the camera's inadequate IR filtering. Unfortunately there have been a few bumps along the way in trying to find a "perfect" solution; some filters introduce green vignetting in the image, etc. I'm not sure where the current status of IR filtration for the EX1/EX3 stands at the moment, if they've found one that's ideal or if the search continues...
dpryke
04-14-2009, 04:49 PM
Has anyone used this filter:
http://www.filmtools.com/schneider-optics-77e-infrared-cut-filter-486-65-031976.html
Is there any difference between this and what we have already been talking about?
That filter is the one we have all been talking about, its the 486 available in standard and thin and also I think the same filter as the 4x4 77(? or something similar).
As far as I understand, this filter was not "Designed exclusively for the Sony EX cameras", the filter was around well before the cameras were on the market and unless I am wrong, it is very unprofessional of that site to claim it was designed for the EX. It is probably the best current choice for the EX, but it is known to introduce a green corner and side vignette when the lens is wide. Fortunately this is hidden in the footage much easier than the IR contamination that would be otherwise visible.
frisco
04-14-2009, 08:34 PM
Has anyone used this filter:
http://www.filmtools.com/schneider-optics-77e-infrared-cut-filter-486-65-031976.html
Is there any difference between this and what we have already been talking about?
Thats the one I bought...... Seems good! Stock lens hood fits over it fine. I bought it 2 weeks ago from Filmtools and was told it was the last one in stock.
frisco
DCSensui
04-15-2009, 12:58 AM
If the hood fits over it, I wonder if Sony's 0.8x WA will fit over it as well?
Or would the reflective surfaces cause a lot of problems?
dpryke
04-15-2009, 08:15 AM
Does anyone think there is a big difference between using a screw in filter or a 4x4? Any advantage