Update – The Multispectral Sony NEX-5 For B&W Photography
Update: you can own this modified camera by taking part in a black and white photography challenge. Read all details here. Good luck!
Wouldn’t it be great if you could shot RAW and get wonderful looking black and white pics just by desaturating and with almost no post-processing work? Photographer Ming Thein did an amazing hacking project on a Sony NEX 5 (price & specs). Before we get into details it is best to read Ming Thein’s motivation for the modification of the NEX-5:
I’ve been paying a lot of attention to black and white tonality both in the past, and of late in conjunction with my serious re-exploration of film; there’s something about the way film responds that gives it wonderful quarter and three-quarter tones. The look is achievable in digital, but it requires a lot of post processing simply because sensors do not natively respond to light in that fashion.
From a more technical point of view, the issue is that digital sensors are optimized to accurately reproduce the colors of the visible spectrum. That’s perfectly fine if you want to take color shots: you want a reliable reproduction of colors. Things, on the other hand, change with B&W photography. Not only it is, as Ming Thein states, a widely subjective aesthetic matter. Moreover, often, if not always, the artistic outcome lies within the tones. Hence, the matter is how to get a film like tone rendering without having to do heavy and time consuming post processing on the computer. A possible way to obtain such a result is to remove all filters from the sensor. Let’s go back to Ming Thein (emphasis partly mine):
Infrared, and to a lesser extent, ultraviolet, photography have been done for some time. There are companies out there which offer (not cheap!) conversions to either or both; there are even companies which offer services removing the anti-aliasing filter – though oddly, not both. But to create what I envisioned as the ultimate black and white camera*, all of this would have to go: no UV or IR filters, no AA filter. Just bare naked sensor. After several days of monkeying around with dozens of tiny ribbon connectors, and breaking one (caveat: the camera of course still works, but that connector will never be able to be opened/ released again) and nerve-wracking moments with various sharp implements, I’m pleased to report that this particular Sony NEX-5 has no filtration at all in front of the sensor, except for the Bayer filter, which is part of the sensor itself and thus cannot be removed. It’s about as close as you’re going to get to bare silicon [...].
This is obviously more than a weekend’s DIY task. Ming Thein spent a lot of time to do the hack, and not everything worked at first glance. Opening such a tiny and densely packed camera isn’t for the faint of heart. But results are spectacular (don’t miss the awesome samples). Back to Ming Thein:
I’m going to be blunt here: the camera doesn’t hit full marks across the board. From a tonal viewpoint, the results are fantastic – just shoot raw and desaturate, and that’s all you have to do for almost every situation. All of the images in this post have had almost no work done on them at all – just desaturate. They came out of the camera 99% there, with this wonderfully filmic quality – even at high ISO. Is the more dynamic range? Not really. Skin tones are smooth yet delicately textured; deep shadows have that glow thanks to IR reflectance; and the detail is definitely better than a standard camera
There are also some drawbacks. Resolution isn’t at best, not because of the sensor but because of the lens (he used the 18-55mm kit lens). The lens resolves good in the center of the frame but isn’t apochromatic enough in the borders to be able to cope with the IR and UV rays reflected by the subject and caught by the sensor. An issue that is normally cut of by the filters that have been removed. The result is a sort of smearing in the corners. Quoting:
The smearing is caused by UV and IR spectrum image forming rays from the subject – cut out by the filter pack, normally – being registered on the sensor at a different physical location to visible light. There is still more visible light, of course, which means that focus is mostly where autofocus puts it, but not for all subjects – warm subjects in low ambient light – people indoors, for instance – tend to be a little back-focused because of this. Outdoors, things are fine (visible light > IR again)
However, the results are amazing. Don’t miss this interesting post and the images shot with the modified NEX 5!
[via mingthein.com]






Carl
5 months ago |His results look like T-MAX.
Sky_walker
5 months ago |Not a new thing.
http://www.spencerscamera.com/store/store_sub.cfm?Category_ID=3&Sub_Category_ID=13 – They sell Sony cameras with IR/UV and cooling conversions. They even got brand new A900. It’s not the cheapest way to get converted camera but the best one I seen on a market (cooling system mixed with IR conversion give really brilliant results).
Tom
5 months ago |Interesting, I have the nex-5n modified by spencers to be full-spectrum, (and with the cooling mod). I did not think of trying BW photography with it! It’s obviously also very nice taking infrared etc with the proper filters for it.
Neo NiGHTS ®
5 months ago |It’d be nice if he had a way to take a picture with a ‘normal’ Nex, then just desaturate in post-processing and compare with his hack (same scenes, of course). So we could see how much difference there actually is.
simon
5 months ago |yeah, the images look fine, but just like that I don’t see anything spectacular without direct comparison.
Bengt Nyman
5 months ago |Agreed!
John Maverick
5 months ago |And I’ve never been taken by B&W digital photography, but the results here are really incredible. And it’s a fascinating discussion, and things I would not have considered. Especially the bit about how non visible light (without IR+UV filters) is focused by the lens differently to visible light and how leads to a lack of sharpness in the corners.
John Maverick
5 months ago |Just to note, my cat was responsible for this garbled message!
Don Cox
5 months ago |This would be much more easily done with a Sigma DSLR such as the SD15, where the IR filter can be removed and replaced easily at any time without all this elaborate surgery.
You can buy an SD15 with a kit lens for about the same price as a NEX 5N.
hobel
5 months ago |Well, lets hope he will never have sensor dust, might be hard to remove it from the soft surface (plastic microlenses) after removing the filter glass layers.
Professional converions get a new glass surface.
Far more interesting would be to remove the bayer filter array.
But that is the hard one… but has been done.
Vivek
5 months ago |Not really. He still has the sensor cover glass intact. The “bare” sensor is not exposed at all.
Admin: This is very old stuff. I did not find the linked article accurate nor interesting. Like some have mentioned, many professional outfits do this for a fee routinely and there are many DIY reports.
Don Cox
5 months ago |I agree it isn’t new, but his photos are nice.
Chris K.
5 months ago |Didn’t remove the Bayer filter? Wimp! (Seriously though, this is nothing particularly new; just removed the UV/IR filters and some post-processing. I’d love to see an NEX without a Bayer filter.)
Bill
5 months ago |I don’t see anything special in these photos. So hard work for such result :/
weedee
5 months ago |In ‘composition’ or ‘theme’ point of view, you’re absolutely right. But when taking B/W photograph, it’s quite difficult to get a ‘real’ black and white in one picture. What we get from digital camera now is ‘dark grey/light grey’ picture only. Unless, like everybody said, we must take a long post processing.
Fix it!
5 months ago |Looks interesting, but since SAR now defaults to mobile version only and cannot be changed to the full web version I can only see half of the images!
Mu55
5 months ago |I have an old Panasonic fx100 (1/1.7 14mp sensor, shoots raw) that i’ve taken apart to clean – the cover glass is removable (actually just falls off), i put it back on because of the magenta colour images – didn’t think to try black & white – this article warrants another look at it… time for some testing
Andrew
5 months ago |Why does anyone like black and white, you’re missing color which is one of the most important elements of the image. It’s even worse than people who shoot razor thin depth of field just to show how “pro” they are.
Vaioy
5 months ago |Could these phyical changes in UV/IR filters be done if we request Sony to update their firmware to enable the removal of UV/IR filtered data and to desaturate, once we set the NEX into a B&W mode for shooting?
If this is possible, then one does not need go in and muck around with the tightly packed microelectronics/flat optical cables…etc.
Anyone who has the ears of the Sony NEX engineers and programmers ?
Pdf Ninja
5 months ago |No, IR/UV filters cannot be implemented in software. Various B&W curves could be implemented, but information that isn’t captured cannot be made up, unless an artists paints it in.
10per
5 months ago |I applaud someone trying new things. I am all for innovation. Who knows where it will lead?
That said, I don’t see the value in messing with may camera to get results that are not that much different than what I get out of a properly exposed RAW file and LR4.
Bengt Nyman
5 months ago |It’s the AA filter and the Bayer filter(s) you want to get rid off.
There are digital B&W cameras like that on the market.
Removing UV and IR filters corrupts the dynamic range by registering UV and IR photons where they do not belong.
Tom
5 months ago |Part of the point is that b&w film in film-cameras are more sensitive to UV and IR than a digital camera (with the filter in place). By removing it, you get more of the info that a film camera has, but that said, by entirely removing it, you likely pick up more ir/uv than a film camera. Still, the examples show potential and for artistic purposes it is all in the eye of the beholder anyways. Accurate range/color balance is subjective anyway, from the point that humans pick up different amounts of light in different wavelengths, than some other animals – there is no universal right or wrong in what to capture – but ultimately (on a larger scale than for human enjoyment), I suppose a full spectrum with much wider range than current sensors are able to capture would record what the universe is really showing us