Tokina 12-24mm IR Use with B+W 092 - Thoughts and Samples

[deadpixel]

Ok, after a week in San Diego test driving my friends Tokina 12-24mm f/4, I decided to take the plunge and got one locally (warranty issues). I also ordered a B+W 092 IR filter which got here yesterday and thanks to a nice clear sky around my office, was able to do some test shots out my window.

Right, let's tackle the lens first...

It's w__i__d__e and the bonus here is that even at 12mm, with regular, thick filters on, there's no vignette, but there's a catch. At 12mm, you'll encounter centre hot-spots at any aperture smaller than 5.6. You'll see the samples with hot-spots below.

The good news is that the hot-spots are less pronounced as the focal lenght increases, so by 18mm, you'll not have this issue.

Here we go with the samples:

#1 - 12mm at f/4

#2 - 12mm at f/5.6

#3 - 12mm at f/8 (notice the hot-spot in the centre)

#4 - 12mm at f/10 (more pronounced hot-spot)

cont...

 

[deadpixel]

...cont

#5 - 18mm at f/8 (no visible hot-spot)

#6 - 24mm at f/8 (no visible hot-spot either)

Unlike the Hoya R72, which blocks visible light upto 720nm, the B+W 092 only blocks visible light upto 650nm, allowing for more orange light to enter the lens. This results in some color in the IR photos taken with this filter. I personally find that I like this effect and will keep this filter. To get the white trees we're so accustomed to with the Hoya R72, we can lighten the Red to get this:

#7 - 12mm at f/4 with the level of red lightened:

That's all for now, I'll post more as time permits and when the 77mm R72 I ordered arrives, I'll test the lens with that filter.

Cheers

 

[eawtan]

Hi,

I had the impression that the B+W 092, Hoya R72, 89b all have the same transmission characteristics ???

 

[teerex]

Thanks for sharing deadpixel. Some guys here will be drooling.

Some observations:-

The shots done at 12mm f/4 and f/5.6. They seem sharper to me than those done at 12mm f/8 and f/10.

DOF, they're about the same for all the 4 shots done at 12mm over the 4 f/ stops. Could this be due to the short focal length of the lens?
Barely any focusing required if you shoot f/8 and above?

As for the hot spot, my opinion is it's tolerable.

 

[haagen_dazs]

i have always been very interested in this lens.
how much did you get it for?

when i was in the USA, every (and seriously EVERY) major vendor in the mth of april was SOLD OUT on this lens.

Hope you like this lens.
Heard alot of great reviews on this one.
=)

 

[deadpixel]

Hi,

I had the impression that the B+W 092, Hoya R72, 89b all have the same transmission characteristics ???

Not quite. The 092 and 89b block light below 650nm only, so some orange visible light passes into the lens. The R72 blocks light below 720nm, which blocks the orange and some red but still allows a tiny amount of red, between 720-750nm in.

B+W has another, I think it's the 093 which is similar to the 87c, blocking out anything below 1000nm. Hoya has the R90, which blocks light below 900nm. Both of these completely block out visible light.

Cheers

 

[deadpixel]

Thanks for sharing deadpixel. Some guys here will be drooling.

Some observations:-

The shots done at 12mm f/4 and f/5.6. They seem sharper to me than those done at 12mm f/8 and f/10.

DOF, they're about the same for all the 4 shots done at 12mm over the 4 f/ stops. Could this be due to the short focal length of the lens?
Barely any focusing required if you shoot f/8 and above?

As for the hot spot, my opinion is it's tolerable.

Ha! Ha! :bsmilie: The reason it's sharper is because these are all handheld and at the smaller apertures, the slower shutter speed + hand shake makes for soft photos. Rest assured, this is a sharp lens. There have been many tests done by others in controlled environments and results show that this baby actually keeps pace with its Nikon counterpart. The only issue you'll have with it is CA in severely bright/backlit situations.

DOF isn't a big issue due to the short focal length. Most shots we take with this lens would be focused on infinity (almost) anyway.

Yep, the hot-spot is manageable as long as you don't over do the exposure.

Cheers

 

[deadpixel]

i have always been very interested in this lens.
how much did you get it for?

when i was in the USA, every (and seriously EVERY) major vendor in the mth of april was SOLD OUT on this lens.

Hope you like this lens.
Heard alot of great reviews on this one.
=)

Tell me about it. One week in San Diego (April too) visiting about half-a-dozen major shops and they were all back-ordered. :angry:

I finally got it in SG for $1100+. It's about $300 more than in other countries but I'm comforting myself with the 2yr local warranty on parts and services. I know J316 has two pieces on their shelves going at that price.

It is a good lens and I've not been disappointed with its performance so far, well, maybe when I need to take a severely backlit shot. :lovegrin:

Cheers

 

[vortex]

nice one!! the WA definitely gives it a much nicer effect. :thumbsup:

im still waiting for the sigma 10-20mm :devil:

 

[deadpixel]

im still waiting for the sigma 10-20mm :devil:

I know what you mean, especially since Sigma's WA lenses seem to have a better control on WA distortions. Still, I hope it's able to use a normal 77mm filter, as opposed to the slim ones, without suffering from vignettes.

Cheers

 

[eawtan]

Not quite. The 092 and 89b block light below 650nm only, so some orange visible light passes into the lens. The R72 blocks light below 720nm, which blocks the orange and some red but still allows a tiny amount of red, between 720-750nm in.

B+W has another, I think it's the 093 which is similar to the 87c, blocking out anything below 1000nm. Hoya has the R90, which blocks light below 900nm. Both of these completely block out visible light.

Cheers

No sure where you got the info from, but various IR web pages do think R72=89b=092

Eg
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/infrared/#FILTER
http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/irfilter.htm
http://www.twintek.nl/infrarood.html
http://dpfwiw.com/ir.htm#r72

 

[deadpixel]

No sure where you got the info from, but various IR web pages do think R72=89b=092

Yea, I've been to all those sites before and read all they have to say ... but just put the filters on your lens, shoot some photos and if they all turn out the same under the same settings good for you, you'd have proved that they are all the same. Me, I'm buying another R72 to play with the 092.

Where did I get the information from? I read alot, I love to read but I also try out the things that I read about.

If I get a chance to join the IR outings (my Sundays are always filled :cry: ) we can swap equipment and compare results. Might be that mine has some problems and is giving me weird results. :dunno:

Cheers

P.S. Did I mention that the 092 filter isn't as dark or opaque as the R72 and that you can actually compose a shot with the filter on? Shucks, I knew I missed out something.

P.P.S.
Wait a minute, I just realised that you're referring to IR transmission. Ok, if it's IR transmission we're taling about, then, yes, they all transmit in the same range (near IR begins at 750nm). The difference that I was referring to is the amount of visible light and visible color that the three filters let in and hence the difference in overall results. The 092 transmits dark orange and red from 650-750nm where as the R72 only transmits dark red from 720-750nm. Sorry :embrass:

 

[vortex]

did u do a new CWB with the new filter?

one thing when i was trying out different IR filters...i didnt change my CWB according to filters. :bsmilie:

i reckon it could possibily give even more different results

 

[deadpixel]

did u do a new CWB with the new filter?

one thing when i was trying out different IR filters...i didnt change my CWB according to filters. :bsmilie:

i reckon it could possibily give even more different results

Yep, that was the first thing I did. Headed to a big sunlit patch of grass during lunch and did a CWB. Man it was hot!! :sweat:

Did it three times because when I did test shots after the first two times I was surprised at the results.

 

[eawtan]

It'll be cool to try out the b+w 092. I find the 2X ELP let's in too much visible light, still prefer the looks of R72.

Yea, I've been to all those sites before and read all they have to say ... but just put the filters on your lens, shoot some photos and if they all turn out the same under the same settings good for you, you'd have proved that they are all the same. Me, I'm buying another R72 to play with the 092.

Where did I get the information from? I read alot, I love to read but I also try out the things that I read about.

If I get a chance to join the IR outings (my Sundays are always filled :cry: ) we can swap equipment and compare results. Might be that mine has some problems and is giving me weird results. :dunno:

Cheers

P.S. Did I mention that the 092 filter isn't as dark or opaque as the R72 and that you can actually compose a shot with the filter on? Shucks, I knew I missed out something.

P.P.S.
Wait a minute, I just realised that you're referring to IR transmission. Ok, if it's IR transmission we're taling about, then, yes, they all transmit in the same range (near IR begins at 750nm). The difference that I was referring to is the amount of visible light and visible color that the three filters let in and hence the difference in overall results. The 092 transmits dark orange and red from 650-750nm where as the R72 only transmits dark red from 720-750nm. Sorry :embrass:

 

[TeddyLoves]

hey deadpixel what's your camera?

 

[deadpixel]

hey deadpixel what's your camera?

I'm using the D70.