Re: Cleaning Sensors
On May 17, 2010, at 16:27, Toine wrote: > Inside a can of "air" you can hear and feel a liquid It can't be > compressed liguid air see: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerosol_spray > > You would need something like this: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_cylinder > > The stuff you force inside your camera is an aerosol. At best it's a > very pure aerosol, most likely it's not. Spray a little "air" on a > clean UV filter and most likely it's dirty after cleaning. > To elaborate, from Falconsafety.com (makers, I think, of the popular "Dust Off" brand): "The Dust-Off brand offers two types of products: General Use and Special Application, while they function the same, the contents are different. In the General Use Dusters, difluoroethane or 152a is the liquefied gas used as the propellant for generating the pressurized cleaning blast. The product is not flammable in accordance with flame extension tests outlined by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, however, under certain extreme circumstances it can be ignited. In the Special Application Dusters, tetrafluoroethane or 134a is the liquefied gas used as the propellant for generating the pressurized cleaning blast. This product is 100% non-flammable and is used in sensitive environments like laboratories where the blast may be dispensed near a Bunson burner." -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Inside a can of "air" you can hear and feel a liquid It can't be compressed liguid air see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerosol_spray You would need something like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_cylinder The stuff you force inside your camera is an aerosol. At best it's a very pure aerosol, most likely it's not. Spray a little "air" on a clean UV filter and most likely it's dirty after cleaning. Toine -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On May 17, 2010, at 15:28, eckinator wrote: > 2010/5/17 Bob Sullivan : >> Canned air, purchased at the local Frys electronics outlet, is not suitable. >> I briefly tested a bit before any camera use and found a residue. >> Having the useless can around, I looked for other opportunities to use it.. >> After cleaning the grill with a wire brush, I had bits of charcoled >> food around the top. >> I thought 'Canned Air' and used some while the grill was already afire. >> It looked like 'The Great and Powerful OZ' with a giant flame and >> cloud of smoke. >> And it said right on the can, Non-Flamible! >> Give the canned air to someone you don't like. >> It's not for cameras. > > LOL... oxygen force feed any fire and you'll see bursts of > affection... but chemically they are correct, oxygen doesn't burn, it > takes two to tango... > Yabbut, that stuff in the cans is rarely oxygen. I mean, there may be some IN there, but that's only part of it. All the same, the whoosh of whatever gas in there probably fans the flames nicely. -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
2010/5/17 Bob Sullivan : > Canned air, purchased at the local Frys electronics outlet, is not suitable. > I briefly tested a bit before any camera use and found a residue. > Having the useless can around, I looked for other opportunities to use it.. > After cleaning the grill with a wire brush, I had bits of charcoled > food around the top. > I thought 'Canned Air' and used some while the grill was already afire. > It looked like 'The Great and Powerful OZ' with a giant flame and > cloud of smoke. > And it said right on the can, Non-Flamible! > Give the canned air to someone you don't like. > It's not for cameras. LOL... oxygen force feed any fire and you'll see bursts of affection... but chemically they are correct, oxygen doesn't burn, it takes two to tango... -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Canned air, purchased at the local Frys electronics outlet, is not suitable. I briefly tested a bit before any camera use and found a residue. Having the useless can around, I looked for other opportunities to use it.. After cleaning the grill with a wire brush, I had bits of charcoled food around the top. I thought 'Canned Air' and used some while the grill was already afire. It looked like 'The Great and Powerful OZ' with a giant flame and cloud of smoke. And it said right on the can, Non-Flamible! Give the canned air to someone you don't like. It's not for cameras. Regards, Bob S. On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:37 AM, William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message ----- From: "Larry Colen" > Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors > > > >> I was trying to blow some stubborn dust of the mirror. It frosted up, >> and when the frost cleared the edge of the mirror was discolored. >> > > Short puffs. > And don't ever clean your mirror. > > William Robb > > -- > 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 above and > follow the directions. > -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
2010/5/17 William Robb : > > Short puffs. > And don't ever clean your mirror. And never huff or you may blow it down =P -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "Larry Colen" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors I was trying to blow some stubborn dust of the mirror. It frosted up, and when the frost cleared the edge of the mirror was discolored. Short puffs. And don't ever clean your mirror. William Robb -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On May 16, 2010, at 5:05 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Larry Colen" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors I didn't wreck a camera with canned air, but I did damage the mirror in my K100 by cleaning it with canned air. I'm almost afraid to ask how you managed that, but I'll ask anyway. So, how did yoiu manage to be such a clumsy oaf that you damaged your camera? I was trying to blow some stubborn dust of the mirror. It frosted up, and when the frost cleared the edge of the mirror was discolored. William Robb -- 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 above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
From: Steven Desjardins I use canned air. It's pretty fast so unless your battery is nearly dead you should be able to pull it off before the mirror comes back. Obviously, don't get the tube so close to the sensor that the cryogenic liquid actually collects on the surface of the sensor. Also, if something were to get in there larger than dust you could blow it around hard enough to nick the sensor. Also be sure you don't accidently grab the WD-40. Problems with canned "air" as I understand them can be threefold: 1. If you are ham-handed and get the propellant on the sensor it can leave a sticky residue that attracts more dust. I HAVE SEEN this one, and am just glad it was NOT ME who effed it up. 2. Some canned "air" uses a solvent propellant that will etch the surface if you get it on there. 3. Too high pressure may damage the sensor surface. According to one site, the sensor has an IR filter over it, so you don't damage the actual sensor, just the IR filter - which may (??) be replaceable without replacing the sensor. Might not cost as much? Still whatever the cost, it's too high if you have to both pay and admit you did something stupid. Sometimes the social costs are more than the actual dollar charge. Plus, you're deprived of your camera until it comes back from repair. -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On May 16, 2010, at 8:19 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
> On 5/16/2010 7:49 PM, William Robb wrote:
>>
>> - Original Message - From: "frank theriault"
>> Subject: Cleaning Sensors
>>
>>
>>> Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD.
>>>
>>> Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals?
>>>
>>> If I can do it myself, how?
>>>
>>> If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>
>> This make people cringe, but I lock the mirror up and shoot the sensor with
>> canned gas.
>> It seems to work, and I haven't hurt anything yet.
>> I mentioned this on ForumsNeurotica and got soundly thrashed for
>> recommending a cleaning method that would surely wreck the camera, so I
>> challenged the good people there to come up with one single instance where
>> they could verify canned gas wrecking a camera.
>> The closest I got was a guy who met a guy coming out of a camera store who
>> had apparently done some damage to his camera while cleaning it, but it
>> wasn't really verifiable that the canned gas was the culprit...
>>
>> William Robb
>>
> I do the same thing. Buy a good quality brand and there's no problems. I
> did have a bargain price product that spit liquid propellant, which would
> probably craze the low pass filter, but I'd never use that on anything
> sensitive.
>
I've ruined negatives with cans of gas that spit liquid. I definitely wouldn't
risk using it on a sensor. Yeah, you can probably get away with it most of the
time. But why take a chance? There are better tools with which to clean a
sensor.
Paul
> --
> {\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
> New;}}
> \viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
> interface subtly weird.\par
> }
>
>
> --
> 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 above and follow
> the directions.
--
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 above and follow
the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On 5/16/2010 7:49 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "frank theriault"
Subject: Cleaning Sensors
Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD.
Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals?
If I can do it myself, how?
If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price?
Thanks!
This make people cringe, but I lock the mirror up and shoot the sensor
with canned gas.
It seems to work, and I haven't hurt anything yet.
I mentioned this on ForumsNeurotica and got soundly thrashed for
recommending a cleaning method that would surely wreck the camera, so
I challenged the good people there to come up with one single instance
where they could verify canned gas wrecking a camera.
The closest I got was a guy who met a guy coming out of a camera store
who had apparently done some damage to his camera while cleaning it,
but it wasn't really verifiable that the canned gas was the culprit...
William Robb
I do the same thing. Buy a good quality brand and there's no problems.
I did have a bargain price product that spit liquid propellant, which
would probably craze the low pass filter, but I'd never use that on
anything sensitive.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
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 above and follow
the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Lock the mirror open, lay the camera on the floor, and urinate on the sensor. I've never heard of a single instance where this failed. (Don't kill me Bill) I use canned air. It's pretty fast so unless your battery is nearly dead you should be able to pull it off before the mirror comes back. Obviously, don't get the tube so close to the sensor that the cryogenic liquid actually collects on the surface of the sensor. Also, if something were to get in there larger than dust you could blow it around hard enough to nick the sensor. Also be sure you don't accidently grab the WD-40. On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > On May 16, 2010, at 4:49 PM, William Robb wrote: > >> >> This make people cringe, but I lock the mirror up and shoot the sensor >> with canned gas. >> It seems to work, and I haven't hurt anything yet. >> I mentioned this on ForumsNeurotica and got soundly thrashed for >> recommending a cleaning method that would surely wreck the camera, so I >> challenged the good people there to come up with one single instance where >> they could verify canned gas wrecking a camera. >> The closest I got was a guy who met a guy coming out of a camera store who >> had apparently done some damage to his camera while cleaning it, but it >> wasn't really verifiable that the canned gas was the culprit... > > I didn't wreck a camera with canned air, but I did damage the mirror in my > K100 by cleaning it with canned air. >> > > -- > Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est > > > > > > -- > 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 above and > follow the directions. > -- Steve Desjardins -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "Larry Colen" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors I didn't wreck a camera with canned air, but I did damage the mirror in my K100 by cleaning it with canned air. I'm almost afraid to ask how you managed that, but I'll ask anyway. So, how did yoiu manage to be such a clumsy oaf that you damaged your camera? William Robb -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:49 AM, William Robb wrote: > This make people cringe, but I lock the mirror up and shoot the sensor with > canned gas. > It seems to work, and I haven't hurt anything yet. > I mentioned this on ForumsNeurotica and got soundly thrashed for > recommending a cleaning method that would surely wreck the camera, so I > challenged the good people there to come up with one single instance where > they could verify canned gas wrecking a camera. > The closest I got was a guy who met a guy coming out of a camera store who > had apparently done some damage to his camera while cleaning it, but it > wasn't really verifiable that the canned gas was the culprit... > > William Robb > I have not heard anything about canned gas this side of the world. Interviewing, a local technician (remember those things are built here...), the thing to worry about is the mirror crashing down on you while you're wiping the sensor because the battery died. They mention, as a rule, that they have an AC adapter to make sure that does not happened. Bong -- Bong Manayon http://www.bong.uni.cc -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On May 16, 2010, at 4:49 PM, William Robb wrote: This make people cringe, but I lock the mirror up and shoot the sensor with canned gas. It seems to work, and I haven't hurt anything yet. I mentioned this on ForumsNeurotica and got soundly thrashed for recommending a cleaning method that would surely wreck the camera, so I challenged the good people there to come up with one single instance where they could verify canned gas wrecking a camera. The closest I got was a guy who met a guy coming out of a camera store who had apparently done some damage to his camera while cleaning it, but it wasn't really verifiable that the canned gas was the culprit... I didn't wreck a camera with canned air, but I did damage the mirror in my K100 by cleaning it with canned air. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "frank theriault" Subject: Cleaning Sensors Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD. Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals? If I can do it myself, how? If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price? Thanks! This make people cringe, but I lock the mirror up and shoot the sensor with canned gas. It seems to work, and I haven't hurt anything yet. I mentioned this on ForumsNeurotica and got soundly thrashed for recommending a cleaning method that would surely wreck the camera, so I challenged the good people there to come up with one single instance where they could verify canned gas wrecking a camera. The closest I got was a guy who met a guy coming out of a camera store who had apparently done some damage to his camera while cleaning it, but it wasn't really verifiable that the canned gas was the culprit... William Robb -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On May 16, 2010, at 5:54 PM, John Sessoms wrote: > From: frank theriault >> Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD. >> Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals? >> If I can do it myself, how? >> If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price? > > My personal choice is to leave it to the professional. I'm afraid I'd be a > little ham-handed and could end up spending a LOT more for repairs. > > If you're going to attempt it yourself, start here: > > http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/index.html > > Forty to fifty dollars USD is not unreasonable IF the shop does a good job. I > had it done once a year. > > The problem is finding a shop that DOES do a good job. I wouldn't trust most > chain stores (like Wolf/Ritz). > > Nikon/Canon offered cleanings at $40 per at the CNPA (Carolinas Nature > Photography Association) annual convention, and they would take all comers, > Nikon/Canon or not ... up until this year when Nikon dropped out and the > Canon rep would only do Canon. > > Don't know yet who I'm going to go to now. > I wouldn't trust anyone cleaning my sensor other than the manufacturer's service center. And I'd be nervous about having them do it. I simply use an ear blower that was sterile when I bought it. It's kept in a box when not in use. If it can't remove a speck, I use the Pentax sensor cleaner, which is quite easy to use and very effective: http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-Image-Sensor-Cleaning-O-ICK1/product-reviews/B0018ODLH6/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1 As one user notes in the amazon reviews, it looks like the kit includes less than a buck worth of material. But it works very well. To me, that makes it a good buy. Paul > -- > 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 above and follow > the directions. -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Frank, It's not hard. My Giotto Rocket blower usually takes care of things. I prefer Pec Pads and Eclipse fluid to the Pentax cleaning kit, personally. Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Sun, 5/16/10, frank theriault wrote: > From: frank theriault > Subject: Cleaning Sensors > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Date: Sunday, May 16, 2010, 8:03 AM > Or more specifically the sensor in my > *istD. > > Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to > professionals? > > If I can do it myself, how? > > If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price? > > Thanks! > > cheers, > frank > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri > Cartier-Bresson > > -- > 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 above and follow the directions. > -- 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 above and follow the directions.
RE: Cleaning Sensors
From: frank theriault Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD. Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals? If I can do it myself, how? If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price? My personal choice is to leave it to the professional. I'm afraid I'd be a little ham-handed and could end up spending a LOT more for repairs. If you're going to attempt it yourself, start here: http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/index.html Forty to fifty dollars USD is not unreasonable IF the shop does a good job. I had it done once a year. The problem is finding a shop that DOES do a good job. I wouldn't trust most chain stores (like Wolf/Ritz). Nikon/Canon offered cleanings at $40 per at the CNPA (Carolinas Nature Photography Association) annual convention, and they would take all comers, Nikon/Canon or not ... up until this year when Nikon dropped out and the Canon rep would only do Canon. Don't know yet who I'm going to go to now. -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
2010/5/16 Dario Bonazza : > Toine wrote: > >> If you can find the Pentax sensor cleaning kit OCK1 or something like >> that grab it. It works wonders and it's easy to use. I saw a movie >> from the Leica factory and they also used the pentax cleaning kit! > > http://www.pentaxfoto.it/it/group/37/product/39357/body/overview/accessories.html > I also use that wand, and I'm not even remotely Leica! Seriously, the O-ICK1 > works smooth, effective and without risks. I shoot a lot in front of the > stage at feet level while musicians play, dance and scream, with a lot (and > I mean A LOT) of dust floating around and getting inside the camera while > changing lenses, and it' works flawlessly. Since then, cleaning sensors is > no longer a nightmare. Thirded! I use it, too. Cheers Ecke -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Toine wrote: If you can find the Pentax sensor cleaning kit OCK1 or something like that grab it. It works wonders and it's easy to use. I saw a movie from the Leica factory and they also used the pentax cleaning kit! http://www.pentaxfoto.it/it/group/37/product/39357/body/overview/accessories.html I also use that wand, and I'm not even remotely Leica! Seriously, the O-ICK1 works smooth, effective and without risks. I shoot a lot in front of the stage at feet level while musicians play, dance and scream, with a lot (and I mean A LOT) of dust floating around and getting inside the camera while changing lenses, and it' works flawlessly. Since then, cleaning sensors is no longer a nightmare. Dario -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
If you can find the Pentax sensor cleaning kit OCK1 or something like that grab it. It works wonders and it's easy to use. I saw a movie from the Leica factory and they also used the pentax cleaning kit! On 16 May 2010 14:03, frank theriault wrote: > Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD. > > Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals? > > If I can do it myself, how? > > If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price? > > Thanks! > > cheers, > frank > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > > -- > 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 above and follow > the directions. > -- 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 above and follow the directions.
RE: Cleaning Sensors
frank theriault wrote: > Subject: Cleaning Sensors > > Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD. > > Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals? > > If I can do it myself, how? > > If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price? > > Thanks! > > cheers, > frank Frank, My *istD was very susceptible to dust and I cleaned it 3 or 4 times. The 10D and K7 don't seem to gather dust (perhaps the shaker option works well?) and I've cleaned them both once. I find I've had to do all of the following each time: 1. Use the sensor shaker (I can't remember whether the *istD hasn't got this as it may be a by-product of shake reduction) 2. Use a blower 3. I've got an Arctic Butterfly from http://www.visibledust.com/ and I use this next 4. Wet clean with a spatula covered with a Pec Pad and a few drops of Eclipse cleaning fluid. The first 3 steps are non-intrusive and if they work are best, but they've never got rid of every spec for me. You need a good nerve to use the wet cleaning system for the first time, but I've found it to be simple and gives the best results. You will need to judge for yourself of course. I got mine from these guys: http://www.copperhillimages.com/shopping/pgm-more_information.php?id=3&=SID# MOREINFO http://tinyurl.com/3x4qhk2 and there's a tutorial here: http://www.copperhillimages.com/index.php?pr=tutorials1 http://tinyurl.com/3axkmpo I had to buy the Eclipse fluid separately in the UK as it can't be shipped overseas. Chris -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
I did 3 methods in the past -I kinda don't clean sensors anymore in the new cameras because the come with a new coating that seems to repel things from building up. In this order when I have to clean a sensor I try: 1) Blowinng -with a blower, I use some cheap Giottos blower 2) A brush -I use this expensive "Sensor Brush" from VisibleDust but there is a DIY version in http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/How_to/a_Brush_Your_Sensor/a_Brush_Your_Sensor.html 3) Finally if everything else fails I do the "wet method" (AKA "Copperhill method") I got my stuff from www.copperhillimages.com but there are some disposable ones called "Sensor Swabs" I never brought it to a shop so I don't know what's reasonable. PS: If you want to DIY and can't build up courage let me know if you want me to help. On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 8:03 AM, frank theriault wrote: > Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD. > > Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals? > > If I can do it myself, how? > > If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price? > > Thanks! > > cheers, > frank > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > > -- > 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 above and follow > the directions. > -- http://www.flickr.com/photos/ferand/ -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
For the most part a good blower seems to keep my sensore clean enough. I have yet to build up the courage to wet clean any of mine. I had to wet clean my D1 after i bought it. Sensore was filthy and i took it to Nikon in Mississauga. IIRC it was $90 plus the governments cut. Dave On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 8:03 AM, frank theriault wrote: > Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD. > > Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals? > > If I can do it myself, how? > > If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price? > > Thanks! > > cheers, > frank > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > > -- > 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 above and follow > the directions. > -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
G'day Frank On Sun, 16 May 2010 08:03 -0400, "frank theriault" wrote: > Or more specifically the sensor in my *istD. > > Is this a do-at-home project or something best left to professionals? > > If I can do it myself, how? > > If I take it to a shop, what's a reasonable price? > I've cleaned the sensor in my *istDS several times without any disasters. Building up the courage to do it is the biggest hurdle. I use a three step approach: 1. The bulb blower. If that doesn't clean the sensor satisfactorily, I move on to: 2. An artists nylon brush. And if further cleaning is needed: 3. The wet swab. For this step I use a home made spatula about the same width as the height of the sensor, covered with a PecPad and with a couple of drops of Eclipse cleaning fluid applied. A couple of references, if you decide to take the plunge: http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/How_to/a_Brush_Your_Sensor/a_Brush_Your_Sensor.html http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/index.html Interestingly, I've so far not needed to clean the sensor on my K200D - the few dust spots that appear are easily cloned out in post processing. It seems that the dust remove function of the K200D actually works reasonably well. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home and the web -- 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 above and follow the directions.
Re: Cleaning sensors
The astronomers sometimes cool their cameras to reduce noise for very long exposures. There are cooled cameras for microscopy as well. My main interest at the moment is high resolution stills and videos of protists where I have plenty of light so noise is not really a problem. But I'll be using UV soon and it will become troublesome at once. All I do is change the lenses in these cameras so that the camera lens covers the exit pupil of the photo eyepiece. For the Quickcam Pro 4000 a 12mm Marshall lens is a good choice and is well corrected and coated. But since it's really only working as a transfer lens it's far less important that the eyepiece. I use Leitz Photo Periplan eyepieces and Leica objectives for bright field and Lomo for phase contrast. The Pentax *ist D is used for low magnification photomicrography only because the Webcam 640 x 480 (and 1280 x 960) is more than enough for 20X objectives and above. D (NPP) Jostein Øksne wrote: > In the amateur astronomy circles, mod'ed webcams are also very > popular. Are their modifications in the same line as yours? > > Jostein > > On 1/2/07, Don Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I use a modified web camera for photomicrography. It makes good stills >> and videos at high magnification. The modification involves removing the >> lens mount from the circuit board (exposing the CCD) cutting off a >> millimeter or so to enable a 12mm Marshall lens, that replaces the >> original, to focus to infinity. The CCD gets crap on it very easily. At >> the magnifications I use -- 1200X and more the dust specs are like >> boulders covering detail in the specimens. Cleaning is a very difficult >> job. because taking it all to pieces and putting it back outside a clean >> room is hopeless. I tried working with the camera inside a plastic bag, >> doesn't help much, if at all. Cleaning the *ist D sensor is a piece of >> cake. I use a Zerostat (probably contains Polonium isotopes) to give it >> a preliminary blow and then a Pasteur pipette with a rubber bulb on the >> back to give a final puff or two. So far it has been successful. But the >> Quickcam Pro is a real pain. I'm going to make a small hood -- wire >> frame and plastic sheet to work in before I try again. >> >> D (NPP) >> >> -- >> Dr E D F Williams >> www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/ >> http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/ >> 41660 TOIVAKKA – Finland - +358400706616 >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> > > -- Dr E D F Williams www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/ http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/ 41660 TOIVAKKA – Finland - +358400706616 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Cleaning sensors
In the amateur astronomy circles, mod'ed webcams are also very popular. Are their modifications in the same line as yours? Jostein On 1/2/07, Don Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I use a modified web camera for photomicrography. It makes good stills > and videos at high magnification. The modification involves removing the > lens mount from the circuit board (exposing the CCD) cutting off a > millimeter or so to enable a 12mm Marshall lens, that replaces the > original, to focus to infinity. The CCD gets crap on it very easily. At > the magnifications I use -- 1200X and more the dust specs are like > boulders covering detail in the specimens. Cleaning is a very difficult > job. because taking it all to pieces and putting it back outside a clean > room is hopeless. I tried working with the camera inside a plastic bag, > doesn't help much, if at all. Cleaning the *ist D sensor is a piece of > cake. I use a Zerostat (probably contains Polonium isotopes) to give it > a preliminary blow and then a Pasteur pipette with a rubber bulb on the > back to give a final puff or two. So far it has been successful. But the > Quickcam Pro is a real pain. I'm going to make a small hood -- wire > frame and plastic sheet to work in before I try again. > > D (NPP) > > -- > Dr E D F Williams > www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/ > http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/ > 41660 TOIVAKKA – Finland - +358400706616 > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Re: sensors or lenses or eyeglasses that are multicoated - what do you guys know of or think of something called Galaxy? A friend out west had some and I used it on my multicoated eye glasses (not glass) I guess you have to de-dust first somehow though. Living in NY and leaving all my windows open all the time it is dust city here. Does blue tack come in rolls by the yard??? vbg of course ann
Re: Cleaning Sensors
I find my istD requires a blow off, every week or so. For some reason, the D2H which is used in very dusty conditions, might need a cleaning every few months. I have no explaination for this. I just use a good huricane blower.Seems to work for most applications. Word of warning.Don't blow on sensor with your mouth. It cost me $90.00 to have the thing cleaned at Nikon.Not from me but the guy i bought the camera off of did that, and i get to fix. Dave > WR> - Original Message - > WR> From: "Markus Maurer" > WR> Subject: RE: Cleaning Sensors > > > >> Hi William and Shel > >> > >> Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust > >> sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than > >> other brands? > >> For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary > >> quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. > >> I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure > >> plate > >> when I change film if it is clean. > > WR> Film is nice, the dust has a moving target.. > > WR> William Robb > > > >
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Herb Chong wrote: a guy on the Minolta mailing list uses Scotch Magic Transparent Tape. no thanks. Herb Oh. _Sensors_. I thought it said "Seniors" so I've been missing all these great pieces of advise! keith - Original Message - From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 1:31 AM Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors I agree. Never stick *anything* to the sensor.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On 29 Oct 2005 at 14:13, Boris Liberman wrote: > Could be... I try to keep my mind away from the dust so that it does not > bother me all too much ;-). The chrome is steadily wearing off my mount to reveal brass so I suspect that a lot of my sensor "dust" is actually ground up lens mount. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On 29 Oct 2005 at 11:57, Don Williams wrote: > Did I not already say that there would > be no residue? Try it yourself Rob and > get back to us. Unless you can't get > real blue tack down there in fly heaven. Yes it's Bostik, It had never ever crossed my mind to try the stuff on a lens, I don't know how many hours I've spent getting the stuff off speakers and other h-fi gear and how many bits of paper and walls I've seen with big oily Blu-tack stains on them. But hell I gave it a try on a HMC filter and it left no mark. I won't be using it on my sensor though, the glass isn't too thick. From the mechanical spec's of the sensor the cover glass is 0.70 ± 0.10mm > Is this the time for funny smiling > faces? I never use them. :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Hi! Shel, I have a suggestion which is related to your question only indirectly. When you switch lenses I (humbly) suggest you turn off the camera... I started doing it about a month ago. I should say that it does indeed reduce the amount of dust your sensor may be collecting. It did for me... And I change the lenses outdoors at least half of the time. But of course it will if you don't use your camera Boris. Put it in a dark corner some place , never turn it on and you will have zero dust problems :-) The inference that the sensor somehow attracts dust whilst it is on I think you will find is flawed. You have been the recipient of good luck I'd suggest. Could be... I try to keep my mind away from the dust so that it does not bother me all too much ;-). Boris
Re: Cleaning Sensors
a guy on the Minolta mailing list uses Scotch Magic Transparent Tape. no thanks. Herb - Original Message - From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 1:31 AM Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors I agree. Never stick *anything* to the sensor.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Rob Studdert wrote: On 29 Oct 2005 at 1:21, P. J. Alling wrote: I expect that the sensor cover is exceedingly thin, while blue tack sounds like it would be wonderful for cleaning relatively thick glass, I may look into it for lenses, I would be afraid of putting too much pressure on the sensor cover and causing it to crack. I suspect too that since it's so close to the imaging surface the big greasy smudges that the Blu-tack leaves... Is that comment re residues from personal experience, Rob? keith ...will affect image quality particularly at small apertures. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Did I not already say that there would be no residue? Try it yourself Rob and get back to us. Unless you can't get real blue tack down there in fly heaven. Is this the time for funny smiling faces? I never use them. Don Rob Studdert wrote: On 29 Oct 2005 at 1:21, P. J. Alling wrote: I expect that the sensor cover is exceedingly thin, while blue tack sounds like it would be wonderful for cleaning relatively thick glass, I may look into it for lenses, I would be afraid of putting too much pressure on the sensor cover and causing it to crack. I suspect too that since it's so close to the imaging surface the big greasy smudges that the Blu-tack leaves will affect image quality particularly at small apertures. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Dr E D F Williams ___ http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams See feature: The Cement Company from Hell Updated: Photomicro Link -- 18 05 2005
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On 29 Oct 2005 at 1:21, P. J. Alling wrote: > I expect that the sensor cover is exceedingly thin, while blue tack > sounds like it would be wonderful for cleaning relatively thick glass, I > may look into it for lenses, I would be afraid of putting too much > pressure on the sensor cover and causing it to crack. I suspect too that since it's so close to the imaging surface the big greasy smudges that the Blu-tack leaves will affect image quality particularly at small apertures. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On Oct 28, 2005, at 10:21 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: I expect that the sensor cover is exceedingly thin, while blue tack sounds like it would be wonderful for cleaning relatively thick glass, I may look into it for lenses, I would be afraid of putting too much pressure on the sensor cover and causing it to crack. I agree. Never stick *anything* to the sensor. Godfrey
Re: Cleaning Sensors
I expect that the sensor cover is exceedingly thin, while blue tack sounds like it would be wonderful for cleaning relatively thick glass, I may look into it for lenses, I would be afraid of putting too much pressure on the sensor cover and causing it to crack. Don Williams wrote: Although the *ist D is the first 'undedicated' digital camera I have it is not the first digital device with CCD sensors, or the first fussy optical device I've needed to clean. The work I do is fussy and dust blobs not only mess up the interpretation of photomicrographs they are terribly annoying as well. I've tried all kind of cleaning methods. Methanol on Ross tissue. Brushes cleaned and prepared in different ways. Now I use 'Blue Tack'. Not only on sensors, but on microscope objectives, camera lenses, eyepieces and other optical components. Although Blue Tack *must* leave something behind after it is peeled off, this trace amount of plasticizer, or solvent, or whatever, is invisible, undetectable and does not effect the optical properties in any way. In my laboratory, in days of yore, we used collodion. A solution (in chloroform) was poured over the surface of the (very expensive) lens or flat and when it had dried was peeled off leaving a pristine surface. There are very expensive lens cleaning solutions available now that are used the same way. However, I clean microscope objectives that cost thousands of dollars with blue tack without the slightest qualm. Cut a piece a little larger than the sensor, press it firmly to the surface making sure it makes contact everywhere. Then get hold of one end (I use forceps) and peel it off. The surface of the window will be as clean as you'll ever get it considering where it is inside the camera. I use the stuff over and over again keeping it in a dust free flat screw top container. I cleaned a lens five inches in diameter the other day. For economical reasons did it in sections. I used a piece of blue tack about an inch square and moved it about. To clean a very tiny lens -- 2mm or less in diameter (the end of a microscope objective) I make a sharp point and press in firmly again the mount including the metal. If this worries you, or if the 'blue tack' you have is suspect, get hold of a dusty lens that doesn't matter too much and try it. Do it a dozen times with the same piece of 'tack' and you'll see how effective this method can be. You can find Blue Tack at Glubie Glue in Indiana -- I think. Don P. J. Alling wrote: As long as you don't have any particularly recalcitrant dust it should be sufficient. Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? Shel -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors I think I have mentioned the Wal-Mart tech who came across the lab to see what I wanted dragging a customers film on the floor behind him. Say, Wheatfield, did he learn his lab techniques from you ? If he was stepping on them to, the yes. William Robb
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On Oct 28, 2005, at 11:44 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: Nothing is worse than having to clean film. My sensor gets nowhere near as dirty as do those negatives in the lab. I used to figure at least thirty minutes cleaning every scan. UGH. That's why I started using dICE with my scanner. It takes a bit longer to scan but it saves me lots of time later. Dust wasn't too much of a problem at 2400ppi but at 4800 it picks up so much microscopic muck that you just don't want to bother :) - Dave
Re: Cleaning Sensors
I do, Boris ... Shel > [Original Message] > From: Boris Liberman > Shel, I have a suggestion which is related to your question only > indirectly. When you switch lenses I (humbly) suggest you turn off the > camera... I started doing it about a month ago. I should say that it > does indeed reduce the amount of dust your sensor may be collecting. It > did for me... And I change the lenses outdoors at least half of the time.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
I think I have mentioned the Wal-Mart tech who came across the lab to see what I wanted dragging a customers film on the floor behind him. Say, Wheatfield, did he learn his lab techniques from you ? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- Tom C wrote: Could also be the use of minilabs operated by untrained or uncaring personnel in a rush to get the stuff out the door. Hadn't thought about the point source thing. WR surprises me sometimes. :) Tom C. From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:07:34 -0600 - Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors Howcome so many folks here have/had all these troubles with dust and scratches on negatives? I think the advent of point source scanners showed a lot of scratches that were invisible with diffusion printing. A lot of my negs from one lab were pretty much unusable as scanned negs, but just fine if enlarged in a darkroom. William Robb
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On 28 Oct 2005 at 11:32, graywolf wrote: > Howcome so many folks here have/had all these troubles with dust and > scratches on negatives? I have only had much of a problem when I did > something stupid, which was often enough but aviodable with a little > effort on my part. Wear those disposable white cotton gloves, blow off > the negative before putting it in the enlarger and after removing it, > then put it back into the negative sleeve, and never never leave an > unprotected negative laying around (this was always my biggest problem). I have never had problems with my negs but anything that comes from an outside lab inevitably sports scratches for some reason. I don't even let labs cut and sleeve my films these days. Also as Bill mentioned certain light sources make scratches more apparent. My previous scanner used cold cathode illumination which was condensed but still relatively soft whereas my current nikon scanner uses LED for illumination. The light is mixed by firing the LEDs into both ends of a glass rod which has a white reflective area along one edge so it remains somewhat directional. The long and short of it is that the LED system really tends to make the smallest of scratches very visible in the scan, the cold cathode illumination wasn't near as bad. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On 28 Oct 2005 at 6:44, Paul Stenquist wrote: > Nothing is worse than having to clean film. My sensor gets nowhere near > as dirty as do those negatives in the lab. I used to figure at least > thirty minutes cleaning every scan. UGH. I've had some pretty bad sensor dust problems that I've only found out about well after the shooting session, some have required extensive cloning on all usable images from the session. Dust on film I've never found to be a real problem but I did invest in good dust management too, scratches on film is what kills me. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On 28 Oct 2005 at 20:03, Boris Liberman wrote: > Shel, I have a suggestion which is related to your question only > indirectly. When you switch lenses I (humbly) suggest you turn off the > camera... I started doing it about a month ago. I should say that it > does indeed reduce the amount of dust your sensor may be collecting. It > did for me... And I change the lenses outdoors at least half of the time. But of course it will if you don't use your camera Boris. Put it in a dark corner some place , never turn it on and you will have zero dust problems :-) The inference that the sensor somehow attracts dust whilst it is on I think you will find is flawed. You have been the recipient of good luck I'd suggest. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Hi! Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? Shel, I have a suggestion which is related to your question only indirectly. When you switch lenses I (humbly) suggest you turn off the camera... I started doing it about a month ago. I should say that it does indeed reduce the amount of dust your sensor may be collecting. It did for me... And I change the lenses outdoors at least half of the time. Boris
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "Tom C" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors Hadn't thought about the point source thing. WR surprises me sometimes. :) Sometimes I amaze myself, too.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
That is very true. Many of my negs show very fine scratches that look to be caused by the film processor. They don't show up on the prints done at the lab. When I scan them with my Minolta Scan Dual II I can see them. If I scan them on the Epson 2450 - very diffused light, they don't show up. Prior to scanning my film, I was not as cognizant of the dust and scratches. If I wanted a reprint or enlargement, I just took the negative to the lab. But scanning at home has opened my eyes. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, October 28, 2005, 9:07:34 AM, you wrote: WR> - Original Message - WR> From: "graywolf" WR> Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors >> Howcome so many folks here have/had all these troubles with dust and >> scratches on negatives? WR> I think the advent of point source scanners showed a lot of scratches that WR> were invisible with diffusion printing. WR> A lot of my negs from one lab were pretty much unusable as scanned negs, but WR> just fine if enlarged in a darkroom. WR> William Robb
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Could also be the use of minilabs operated by untrained or uncaring personnel in a rush to get the stuff out the door. Hadn't thought about the point source thing. WR surprises me sometimes. :) Tom C. From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:07:34 -0600 - Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors Howcome so many folks here have/had all these troubles with dust and scratches on negatives? I think the advent of point source scanners showed a lot of scratches that were invisible with diffusion printing. A lot of my negs from one lab were pretty much unusable as scanned negs, but just fine if enlarged in a darkroom. William Robb
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors Howcome so many folks here have/had all these troubles with dust and scratches on negatives? I think the advent of point source scanners showed a lot of scratches that were invisible with diffusion printing. A lot of my negs from one lab were pretty much unusable as scanned negs, but just fine if enlarged in a darkroom. William Robb
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Howcome so many folks here have/had all these troubles with dust and scratches on negatives? I have only had much of a problem when I did something stupid, which was often enough but aviodable with a little effort on my part. Wear those disposable white cotton gloves, blow off the negative before putting it in the enlarger and after removing it, then put it back into the negative sleeve, and never never leave an unprotected negative laying around (this was always my biggest problem). If I had to guess, it would be that people skip that step of blowing off the negative before putting it back into the sleeve thereby insuring that dust gets into the sleeve, and everytime the negative is inserted or removed it get more scratched. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- Bruce Dayton wrote: Of course, film has a huge problem with dust after the negative has been developed. Then every time you do something with it, you get lots of dust and scratches. I have spent significantly less time dealing with dust with digital than I did with film.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "David Mann" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors I don't think the sensor is particularly delicate, use the same caution you would use when cleaning a good lens. I thought SMC lenses (you did say "good", right?) didn't require any caution. They can be damaged by cleaning if you work at it. William Robb
Re: Cleaning Sensors
If you think about it, the only way you could have an air tight SLR is if the lens had no moving parts, or it was vacuum sealed. Unfortunately the lenses do have moving parts and therefore they act like a bellows sucking air and out of the mirror chamber. So any DSLR camera that is used much is going to need to have dust cleaned off the sensor now and then. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- Markus Maurer wrote: Hi William and Shel Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than other brands? For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure plate when I change film if it is clean. greetings Markus Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel
RE: Cleaning Sensors
BluTack sounds like the handiest thing since Sliced Bread and Duct Tape! ;-) http://www.glubie.com/01_Pages/Blu-Tack.htm Don > -Original Message- > From: Don Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 12:13 AM > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors > > > Although the *ist D is the first > 'undedicated' digital camera I have it > is not the first digital device with CCD > sensors, or the first fussy optical > device I've needed to clean. The work I > do is fussy and dust blobs not only mess > up the interpretation of > photomicrographs they are terribly > annoying as well. > > I've tried all kind of cleaning methods. > Methanol on Ross tissue. Brushes cleaned > and prepared in different ways. Now I > use 'Blue Tack'. Not only on sensors, > but on microscope objectives, camera > lenses, eyepieces and other optical > components. Although Blue Tack *must* > leave something behind after it is > peeled off, this trace amount of > plasticizer, or solvent, or whatever, is > invisible, undetectable and does not > effect the optical properties in any > way. In my laboratory, in days of yore, > we used collodion. A solution (in > chloroform) was poured over the surface > of the (very expensive) lens or flat and > when it had dried was peeled off leaving > a pristine surface. There are very > expensive lens cleaning solutions > available now that are used the same > way. However, I clean microscope > objectives that cost thousands of > dollars with blue tack without the > slightest qualm. > > Cut a piece a little larger than the > sensor, press it firmly to the surface > making sure it makes contact everywhere. > Then get hold of one end (I use forceps) > and peel it off. The surface of the > window will be as clean as you'll ever > get it considering where it is inside > the camera. I use the stuff over and > over again keeping it in a dust free > flat screw top container. I cleaned a > lens five inches in diameter the other > day. For economical reasons did it in > sections. I used a piece of blue tack > about an inch square and moved it about. > To clean a very tiny lens -- 2mm or less > in diameter (the end of a microscope > objective) I make a sharp point and > press in firmly again the mount > including the metal. > > If this worries you, or if the 'blue > tack' you have is suspect, get hold of a > dusty lens that doesn't matter too much > and try it. Do it a dozen times with the > same piece of 'tack' and you'll see how > effective this method can be. You can > find Blue Tack at Glubie Glue in Indiana > -- I think. > > Don > > P. J. Alling wrote: > > As long as you don't have any particularly recalcitrant dust it should > > be sufficient. > > > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > >> Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the > >> sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual > >> pixel > >> things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for > protection, > >> and, therefore, of a durable nature? > >> > >> I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles > >> removed. Is > >> that OK? Any other suggestions? > >> > >> > >> Shel > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Dr E D F Williams > ___ > http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams > See feature: The Cement Company from Hell > Updated: Photomicro Link -- 18 05 2005 >
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Nothing is worse than having to clean film. My sensor gets nowhere near as dirty as do those negatives in the lab. I used to figure at least thirty minutes cleaning every scan. UGH. Paul On Oct 27, 2005, at 11:39 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Markus Maurer" Subject: RE: Cleaning Sensors Hi William and Shel Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than other brands? For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure plate when I change film if it is clean. Film is nice, the dust has a moving target.. William Robb
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On Oct 28, 2005, at 10:23 AM, William Robb wrote: I don't think the sensor is particularly delicate, use the same caustion you would use when cleaning a good lens. I thought SMC lenses (you did say "good", right?) didn't require any caution. - Dave
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Shel, There are already lots of replies, but I'll add mine without looking at them so I'm not influenced - Sensor cleaning is an emotive issue. I change lenses too often in places I shouldn't. The cover over the sensor is a filter. Most digitals have them though I think the Kodak 14 megapixels don't. The worst my sensor has ever been was caused by a blower brush. It was brand new and full of dust. Blowers pull in the air where you are, if there is dust in it it will be propelled towards your sensor at high speed. I don't use them. The local Pentax importers use dry nitrogen to clean the sensors. This is I think 99.9% pure nitrogen so when it comes out under pressure there is no water vapour to freeze and damage the filter over the sensor. A dry nitrogen setup will cost you about AU$200 plus gas. I've considered it but haven't gotten around to it. Canned air is commonly used but you must be very careful not to hold the can so that the propellant escapes as this is hard to clean off and will take a lot of effort and if it gets under the filter you are in trouble. This goes for dust as well. It is possible to spray around enough air to get the dust lodged between the filter and the sensor. I've never seen it but I'm told it's possible. I use compressed CO2 which does not have a propellant but can cause water vapour to form if you are not careful - I haven't had it freeze yet. Sensor swabs seem like a good idea but they supposedly have one small point of contact and can miss the dust you want to get rid of completely. I have a sensor swipe (see http://www.pbase.com/image/15473243 ) It does a good job if you can get the Pec Pad wrapped around it correctly. I now use this for the stubborn dust only. It has only failed on one spec of dust on my second istD body. It's off to C R Kennedy soon for a professional job. It has gotten rid of all sorts of crud that has gotten on to my sensor. For light, non-adhesive dust I have a visible dust sensor brush from http://www.visibledust.com Both the full size and light brushes do a wonderful job. For a regular clean of light dust they are great. there are a few other options available now - including one from Copper Hill who provide the sensor swipe. That's about it for my experience (and Journey) in cleaning sensors. Hope it is of some use to you. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? Shel
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On Oct 27, 2005, at 9:35 PM, William Robb wrote: That reminds me. It's probably about time to clean the sensor again. I'm guessing I end up cleaning it 4 - 6 times a year. If I see the dust in an image, it gets cleaned right away. If I'm making a special effort to get some shots, driving for 2 hours, etc., it gets cleaned as a matter of preventive maintenance. It seems more important if the lens is very long, or else if I am shooting macro. It's MOST important if you tend to work at small lens openings a lot. I tend to work between wide open and f/8 most of the time with my usual range of focal lengths. Godfrey
Re: Cleaning Sensors
The best technology in this domain is in the Olympus E system bodies. They have a sensor cleaning cycle built in every time you turn the camera on or change a lens. But it's not a big problem with the Pentax. I've cleaned one of my DS bodies a total of twice, the other never. And I'm not exactly "clean room" careful with changing lenses. ;-) Godfrey On Oct 27, 2005, at 7:55 PM, Markus Maurer wrote: Hi William and Shel Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than other brands? For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure plate when I change film if it is clean. greetings Markus Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Although the *ist D is the first 'undedicated' digital camera I have it is not the first digital device with CCD sensors, or the first fussy optical device I've needed to clean. The work I do is fussy and dust blobs not only mess up the interpretation of photomicrographs they are terribly annoying as well. I've tried all kind of cleaning methods. Methanol on Ross tissue. Brushes cleaned and prepared in different ways. Now I use 'Blue Tack'. Not only on sensors, but on microscope objectives, camera lenses, eyepieces and other optical components. Although Blue Tack *must* leave something behind after it is peeled off, this trace amount of plasticizer, or solvent, or whatever, is invisible, undetectable and does not effect the optical properties in any way. In my laboratory, in days of yore, we used collodion. A solution (in chloroform) was poured over the surface of the (very expensive) lens or flat and when it had dried was peeled off leaving a pristine surface. There are very expensive lens cleaning solutions available now that are used the same way. However, I clean microscope objectives that cost thousands of dollars with blue tack without the slightest qualm. Cut a piece a little larger than the sensor, press it firmly to the surface making sure it makes contact everywhere. Then get hold of one end (I use forceps) and peel it off. The surface of the window will be as clean as you'll ever get it considering where it is inside the camera. I use the stuff over and over again keeping it in a dust free flat screw top container. I cleaned a lens five inches in diameter the other day. For economical reasons did it in sections. I used a piece of blue tack about an inch square and moved it about. To clean a very tiny lens -- 2mm or less in diameter (the end of a microscope objective) I make a sharp point and press in firmly again the mount including the metal. If this worries you, or if the 'blue tack' you have is suspect, get hold of a dusty lens that doesn't matter too much and try it. Do it a dozen times with the same piece of 'tack' and you'll see how effective this method can be. You can find Blue Tack at Glubie Glue in Indiana -- I think. Don P. J. Alling wrote: As long as you don't have any particularly recalcitrant dust it should be sufficient. Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? Shel -- Dr E D F Williams ___ http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams See feature: The Cement Company from Hell Updated: Photomicro Link -- 18 05 2005
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On 27 Oct 2005 at 22:49, Tom C wrote: > Across the board, I see the dust most often in wide expanses of the > composition that very little in tone and color... sky... clouds... usually. Generally you need an expanse of some area colour to see particles on the sensor but in all cases you'll find that anything there becomes more prevalent as the aperture is closed down. If you want a real shock shoot an evenly illuminated surface at various apertures then use the PS autolevels function to stretch the histogram. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Dust usually gets into the mirror box when you change the lens, from there it finds it's way to the sensor when an exposure its made. The camera is only as well sealed as the lens, (no matter who makes the camera). Markus Maurer wrote: Hi William and Shel Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than other brands? For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure plate when I change film if it is clean. greetings Markus Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Thanks for all the suggestions ... everyone's input is appreciated. Shel
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Across the board, I see the dust most often in wide expanses of the composition that very little in tone and color... sky... clouds... usually. Tom C. From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 22:35:05 -0600 - Original Message - From: "Tom C" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors That reminds me. It's probably about time to clean the sensor again. I'm guessing I end up cleaning it 4 - 6 times a year. If I see the dust in an image, it gets cleaned right away. If I'm making a special effort to get some shots, driving for 2 hours, etc., it gets cleaned as a matter of preventive maintenance. It seems more important if the lens is very long, or else if I am shooting macro. William Robb
RE: Cleaning Sensors
Hi Markus ... Dust is an issue with film. I'd blow my camera bodies out before each day of shooting, and film easily picks up dust (and scratches). Don't know if there are better sealed bodies, but if you're changing lenses, there's no seal anyway. I've had the DS about a month or six weeks, and frequently change lenses, so it's no surprise to me that there's a speck or two of dust that needs to be removed. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Markus Maurer > Hi William and Shel > > Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust > sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than > other brands? > For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary > quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. > I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure plate > when I change film if it is clean.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Never heard of a hurricane blower. Is that a brand name or some specific type of blower? Shel "Am I paranoid or perceptive?" > [Original Message] > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > You have probaly gotten the answers you need.However. > > A good hurricane blower has kept dust from all my digital sensors.
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Yes ... two nice big blobs ... Tks for the suggestions. Got quite a few to consider ;-)) Shel > [Original Message] > From: Godfrey DiGiorgi > First, why? Have you seen evidence of dust in your photographs?
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "Tom C" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors That reminds me. It's probably about time to clean the sensor again. I'm guessing I end up cleaning it 4 - 6 times a year. If I see the dust in an image, it gets cleaned right away. If I'm making a special effort to get some shots, driving for 2 hours, etc., it gets cleaned as a matter of preventive maintenance. It seems more important if the lens is very long, or else if I am shooting macro. William Robb
Re: Cleaning Sensors
That reminds me. It's probably about time to clean the sensor again. I'm guessing I end up cleaning it 4 - 6 times a year. If I see the dust in an image, it gets cleaned right away. If I'm making a special effort to get some shots, driving for 2 hours, etc., it gets cleaned as a matter of preventive maintenance. Tom C. From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:15:30 +1000 On 27 Oct 2005 at 22:04, William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message ----- > From: "Bruce Dayton" > Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors > > > > Of course, film has a huge problem with dust after the negative has > > been developed. Then every time you do something with it, you get > > lots of dust and scratches. I have spent significantly less time > > dealing with dust with digital than I did with film. > > Digital's making you lazy Ahh, that's what it's coming down to, one must suffer for ones art ;-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
As long as you don't have any particularly recalcitrant dust it should be sufficient. Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? Shel -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Cleaning Sensors
On 27 Oct 2005 at 22:04, William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Bruce Dayton" > Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors > > > > Of course, film has a huge problem with dust after the negative has > > been developed. Then every time you do something with it, you get > > lots of dust and scratches. I have spent significantly less time > > dealing with dust with digital than I did with film. > > Digital's making you lazy Ahh, that's what it's coming down to, one must suffer for ones art ;-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors Of course, film has a huge problem with dust after the negative has been developed. Then every time you do something with it, you get lots of dust and scratches. I have spent significantly less time dealing with dust with digital than I did with film. Digital's making you lazy WW
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Of course, film has a huge problem with dust after the negative has been developed. Then every time you do something with it, you get lots of dust and scratches. I have spent significantly less time dealing with dust with digital than I did with film. -- Best regards, Bruce Thursday, October 27, 2005, 8:39:51 PM, you wrote: WR> - Original Message - WR> From: "Markus Maurer" WR> Subject: RE: Cleaning Sensors >> Hi William and Shel >> >> Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust >> sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than >> other brands? >> For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary >> quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. >> I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure >> plate >> when I change film if it is clean. WR> Film is nice, the dust has a moving target.. WR> William Robb
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "Markus Maurer" Subject: RE: Cleaning Sensors Hi William and Shel Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than other brands? For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure plate when I change film if it is clean. Film is nice, the dust has a moving target.. William Robb
RE: Cleaning Sensors
On 28 Oct 2005 at 4:55, Markus Maurer wrote: > Hi William and Shel > > Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust > sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than > other brands? > For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary > quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. > I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure plate > when I change film if it is clean. greetings Markus The fundamental difference between a traditional SLR and a DSLR WRT dust collection is that DSLRs have a fixed sensing element, the film surface obviously moves frame to frame so is generally far less of a problem. I'm sure that the same amount of dust gets sucked in due to lens focus/zoom movements and enters the mirror box whilst lenses are being changed but yes it does pose more of a problem for DSLRs. Systems have been developed to attempt to counter the problem but basically a good puff of clean air will solve most DSLR dust problems. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: Cleaning Sensors
Hi William and Shel Does every digital SLR need that sensor cleaning or are there better dust sealed bodies and are the Pentax ones better or worse in this regard than other brands? For me as a film user, that "cleaning sensor thing" seems to be necessary quite often, Shel's camera is nearly new. I seldom clean my film bodies, I just have a look at the film pressure plate when I change film if it is clean. greetings Markus >> >>> Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the >>> sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual >>> pixel >>
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Shel You have probaly gotten the answers you need.However. A good hurricane blower has kept dust from all my digital sensors. Don't use anything with bristtles. I dont care what people say, they are not ment for sensor cleaning. Only once did i have to send in a digi. The guy i bought my D1 mouth blew dust of and left spittle. Nikon took care oF that for $90.00 cANADIAN Dave > Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the > sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel > things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, > and, therefore, of a durable nature? > > I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is > that OK? Any other suggestions? > > > Shel >
Re: Cleaning Sensors
First, why? Have you seen evidence of dust in your photographs? I use a Giottos Rocket hand-bulb blower to clean dust off. It is always kept wrapped up to prevent dust from getting in it. In the event that that isn't sufficient, I use a Visible Dust Sensor Brush ... Yeah, if you're really eager, you can find a cosmetics brush that is of the same composition and save a bunch of money, but I'm lazy and I had the money at the time. Beyond that I use Pec pads and Eclipse solution. The sensor has a cover on it. It's not particularly delicate, but it IS delicate. You should never put pressure on it, or get goo on it. That's why I don't trust canned air. Godfrey On Oct 27, 2005, at 2:16 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? Shel
RE: Cleaning Sensors
I agree with both the "good lens" analogy and canned air. I do take two extra precautions. I always have 2-4 cans of air around, when I use one on mirrors, or the sensor, I pick one that is 1/2 - 2/3 empty. A little less pressure, and a lot less chance of spraying any liquid. I have seen the liquid spray cause a colored film on mirrors that was very difficult to remove. I wouldn't want this to happen to the D sensor. Also, when I spray a camera or lens I start the air flow, then move the camera or lens in front of it. I try never to move the can of air while spraying. Don > -Original Message- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 4:23 PM > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Shel Belinkoff" > Subject: Cleaning Sensors > > > > Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the > > sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual > > pixel > > things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for > protection, > > and, therefore, of a durable nature? > > > > I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. > > Is > > that OK? Any other suggestions? > > I don't think the sensor is particularly delicate, use the same > caustion you > would use when cleaning a good lens. > Blower brushes may not be the best choice, as they tend to have > dust sucked > inside them. > I use canned air on mine, and haven't had any problems. Make sure > you don't > tip the can, and make a couple of "trial squirts" to make sure it isn't > shooting vapour. > I plan on picking up a cleaning brush at some point, on the > offchance I get > something stuck to the sensor that won't blow off, but so far, I am > resisting the purchase of one of the specialty brushes. I am of > the opinion > that a good quality nylon bristle make-up brush is going to be > much the same > thing. > As you can probably tell, I am pretty casual about sensor cleaning.. > > William Robb > > >
Re: Cleaning Sensors
Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? The filter in front of the sensor is SMC, if I recall correctly, so it should be pretty tough. Most people, sensibly, clean it with extreme caution, however! I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? Sounds fine to me... :-) S
Re: Cleaning Sensors
That product is mentioned in the article I mentioned. The article is about duplicating it at a fraction of the cost. rg Jim Colwell wrote: see www.visibledust.com
Re: Cleaning Sensors
I use a sterile ear syringe that I purchased at a pharmacy. I keep it in a box when not in use, so it is dust free. It blows hard enough to remove dust specs without ever touching the sensor. Paul On Oct 27, 2005, at 5:16 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? Shel
Re: Cleaning Sensors
see www.visibledust.com
Re: Cleaning Sensors
http://tinyurl.com/4ugeb rg Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? Shel
Re: Cleaning Sensors
- Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" Subject: Cleaning Sensors Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the sensor thingy. It looks like there's a plastic layer over the actual pixel things. Correct? Is that particularly delicate or is it for protection, and, therefore, of a durable nature? I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles removed. Is that OK? Any other suggestions? I don't think the sensor is particularly delicate, use the same caustion you would use when cleaning a good lens. Blower brushes may not be the best choice, as they tend to have dust sucked inside them. I use canned air on mine, and haven't had any problems. Make sure you don't tip the can, and make a couple of "trial squirts" to make sure it isn't shooting vapour. I plan on picking up a cleaning brush at some point, on the offchance I get something stuck to the sensor that won't blow off, but so far, I am resisting the purchase of one of the specialty brushes. I am of the opinion that a good quality nylon bristle make-up brush is going to be much the same thing. As you can probably tell, I am pretty casual about sensor cleaning.. William Robb
