Re: IR Camera Conversion and hotspots

> Trevor,
>
> You'd think I know the answer to your question since I have been doing
> IR on a shoestring for a number of years but unfortunately I can't
> recommend something - it seems to me that ultimately it depends on
> funds and how big of an image file you are looking for. I'd say that
> if you are doing IR you could sacrifice on sensor / file size. But
> then I have usually been cheap!
>
> As for the hotspots ... I've not seen them in a Nikon but have in a
> Canon Digital Rebel. See here:
>
> http://people.rit.edu/andpph/ppic-work/pages/ir-wing-artifact-UFO-4108.htm
>
> or here:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/mnltwb
>
> Is this a lens induced problem? I think it very well may be but I  
> don't
> think this is associated with every lens. It depends on design I'd  
> say.
> Since at the time the photograph is made the mirror is up and there is
> nothing between lens and sensor it has to be lens dependent IMO and
> therefore which camera body you use should be irrelevant.
>
> andy
>
>
>
>
> trevor@... wrote:
>
>> Weighing a few options here for a DSLR IR conversion:
>> 1. Upgrade from my D200 to a D300, and send the former to one of  
>> those  "doctors" that will remove the IR filter from the sensor.
>> 2. Purchase a used D70 (or, maybe, it's a D70s) that has a busted  
>> flash for about $150 and send that in. Less money, but smaller  
>> images.
>> What would you do? The second option is most attractive  
>> financially,  and allows me to spend cash on glass. I only have a  
>> few days here in  Raleigh to decide.
>> One more thing, I read somewhere, maybe it was in a PF post, about  
>> Nikon glass being prone to "hotspots" with IR photography in  
>> DSLRs.  The guy at Peace Camera said he'd never heard of it. I know  
>> for a fact  I've had the problem myself. Would removing the IR  
>> filter do anything  about this? This is my motivation to neuter the  
>> D200.
>