Wrong. :)
http://www.jtwastronomy.com/tutorials/debayer.html
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:29 AM, P. J. Alling
wrote:
> For demosaicing(sp???) to work, the firmware has to take into account the
> color filters over each photosite. If you could remover the Bayer filter,
> (which I think is impossib
For demosaicing(sp???) to work, the firmware has to take into account
the color filters over each photosite. If you could remover the Bayer
filter, (which I think is impossible, based on my knowledge of how it's
applied), the camera would need completely rewritten firmware, possibly
even new h
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
>
> Gonz wrote:
>>
>> I would be just as interesting if not more interesting to me to have
>> the Bayer filter removed (is that even possible?). That would make
>> for a cool B&W camera. don't know if the software would support this
>> kind of
David J Brooks wrote:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
I forgot to mention that the 28-105 is arguably the sharpest kit lens I've
ever used. I picked it up because I couldn't afford the 24-70, already had
a tammy 28-75, and didn't have a weather proof standard range zoom.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> I forgot to mention that the 28-105 is arguably the sharpest kit lens I've
> ever used. I picked it up because I couldn't afford the 24-70, already had
> a tammy 28-75, and didn't have a weather proof standard range zoom.
which verdsion, i have
haha
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
>
> Gonz wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, you would be stuck using physical colored filters instead of
>> tweaking the B&W virtually in LR/PS. Like back in the bad ole days of
>> B&W film. You only get that chance to get it right with the physical
>>
Gonz wrote:
Yeah, you would be stuck using physical colored filters instead of
tweaking the B&W virtually in LR/PS. Like back in the bad ole days of
B&W film. You only get that chance to get it right with the physical
filters, lots of chances with the full Bayer filtered image.
That's a big
Yeah, you would be stuck using physical colored filters instead of
tweaking the B&W virtually in LR/PS. Like back in the bad ole days of
B&W film. You only get that chance to get it right with the physical
filters, lots of chances with the full Bayer filtered image.
That's a big negative.
On M
Gonz wrote:
I would be just as interesting if not more interesting to me to have
the Bayer filter removed (is that even possible?). That would make
for a cool B&W camera. don't know if the software would support this
kind of image though (in raw).
My understanding is that the Bayer filter i
I would be just as interesting if not more interesting to me to have
the Bayer filter removed (is that even possible?). That would make
for a cool B&W camera. don't know if the software would support this
kind of image though (in raw).
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> I for
I forgot to mention that the 28-105 is arguably the sharpest kit lens
I've ever used. I picked it up because I couldn't afford the 24-70,
already had a tammy 28-75, and didn't have a weather proof standard
range zoom.
In decent light, I'm quite happy to leave it on my camera. I don't know
h
ng it as well. I have a k-10 I could use. Any
>> thoughts Mark?
>>
>> Cheers, Christine
>>
>> Christine Aguila, Asst. Professor
>> Communications Dept.
>> Truman College
>> FC4 President
>>
>>> On May 16, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Christine Ni
on the IR light and is accurate.
Mark
On 5/17/2015 12:07 PM, John wrote:
On 5/15/2015 11:56 PM, Mark C wrote:
With my IR converted K10D only working with manual lenses, I decided to
convert another camera for IR use.
Is it something in the IR conversion process that disables auto-focus
o metering / auto modes no longer work. They
used to work, but the camera broke nothing to do with the IR conversion.
Mark
On 5/17/2015 12:07 PM, John wrote:
On 5/15/2015 11:56 PM, Mark C wrote:
With my IR converted K10D only working with manual lenses, I decided to
convert another camera
On 5/15/2015 11:56 PM, Mark C wrote:
With my IR converted K10D only working with manual lenses, I decided to
convert another camera for IR use.
Is it something in the IR conversion process that disables auto-focus?
--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we
Mark?
Cheers, Christine
Christine Aguila, Asst. Professor
Communications Dept.
Truman College
FC4 President
On May 16, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Christine Nielsen wrote:
I'm intrigued by the IR conversion, too... I have an *ist-d or a k-7 I'd
consider converting... Any thoughts on which is th
Am 16.05.15 um 21:32 schrieb Christine Nielsen:
I'm intrigued by the IR conversion, too... I have an *ist-d or a k-7I'd
consider converting...
If your *istD is anything like my *istDS it has some IR capability even
in its original unmodified form. Not fast enough for handheld
Yep I'm thinking of doing it as well. I have a k-10 I could use. Any thoughts
Mark?
Cheers, Christine
Christine Aguila, Asst. Professor
Communications Dept.
Truman College
FC4 President
> On May 16, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Christine Nielsen wrote:
>
> I'm intrigued by the IR c
I'm intrigued by the IR conversion, too... I have an *ist-d or a k-7 I'd
consider converting... Any thoughts on which is the better candidate?
-c
On May 16, 2015, at 9:49 AM, Christine Aguila wrote:
Thanks for the link, Mark! I just may convert my k-10D. This idea gets a
ser
Thanks for the link, Mark! I just may convert my k-10D. This idea gets a
serious think. He seems like a nice guy. Read is bio etc.
Might be fun to do Urban IR.
And nice test shots by the way!
Cheers, Christine
> On May 15, 2015, at 10:56 PM, Mark C wrote:
>
> With my IR converted K10D
Am 16.05.15 um 05:56 schrieb Mark C:
So here are some test shots with the newly converted camera - no
interesting compositions but just tests of the cameras abilities:
http://www.markcassino.com/b2evolution/index.php/testing-ir-converted-nikon-p6000?blog=9
Great. And a striking example that t
With my IR converted K10D only working with manual lenses, I decided to
convert another camera for IR use. Sent my old Nikon P6000 in for the
process. While this is a very flawed camera in terms of poorly
implemented features, it takes good photos and produces a pretty robust
13.5 MP file. The
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Mark C wrote:
> I bought an IR converted camera form Pro Camera Repair and it has worked
> fine. Their website says they charge $200 for an APS-C DSLR.
Yes that is correct, i contacted them after you sent me the link. I
also would need to send in the lens that woul
I bought an IR converted camera form Pro Camera Repair and it has worked
fine. Their website says they charge $200 for an APS-C DSLR.
On 2/5/2013 9:22 AM, Walter Hamler wrote:
Anyone here had a camera converted for IR use? I'm thinking of having
a spare body converted (Olympus EPL-2) and wonde
Thanks David. I have a quote from Lifepixel for 250, which I think is
about what it will be at most places. Just have to decide if I really
want to do it.
Walt
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 10:50 AM, David J Brooks wrote:
> Nevber used a company, i bought mine alrwady done Canon G3. Lifepixel
> has a
Anyone here had a camera converted for IR use? I'm thinking of having
a spare body converted (Olympus EPL-2) and wondered who to trust.
Walt
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
Mishka
You must have read my mind.
I have sent an inquiry email to Lifepixel dot com this morning. I'll
pass on any info they send me on converting the istD.
I don't want to convert any of my Nikons, but since i have two istD's,
i thought i would convert one and still try and sell the other.
Doing an IR-only conversion means pulling the IR-block filter and
replacing it in the sensor assembly. Any place that does it for the
Nikons should have the right pieces to do it for the Pentax since
they use a very similar or the same sensor assembly. I'd hunt one of
them up and talk to th
does anyone knows where it can be done with istdl? all the places i've
seen do that with
canon or nikon,,,
thanks,
mike
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
29 matches
Mail list logo
