M9 Ultimate Sensor Cleaning Device

[Guest WPalank]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

 

Dear Leica Fanatics,

 

Today I got to exercise an idea I've had for quite sometime, as luck would have it, after leaving my group private practice. My former business partners just renovated one of their offices and bought a few brand spankin' new Carl Zeiss Surgical Operating Microscopes. Since only one partner was working today in an office with 5 suites, I was promised one of them to myself (well, as long as I brought in a few bagels for my lovely former staff members). Unfortunately, they do not have a beam splitter yet, very expensive and necessary to capture images via slr or video camera. Sorry! This is a device, by the way, I have used during the course of my professional career thousands of times in the past.

 

I did not have the time to check out a different camera (like my Canon 5D Mark II) to make an honest comparison. My feeling is that I would have found the same amount of crud no matter what camera I was looking at (Nikon, Canon, M8, etc.)

 

Here are the findings of my totally unscientific study. Again, I apologize for not having images, but I'll try to describe what I saw and what did and didn't work. My hypothesis was that I could do a better job cleaning my sensor using a surgical operating microscope due to increase magnification and light (fiber optic source) than under normal lighting conditions.

 

1) Once I figured out how to focus on the sensor, kind of looking into a clear pool of blue-green water, I was amazed and scared to death at what I could see. Yes Einstein, visibility was significantly increased over any other means I had used in the past, surgical loupes included

 

2) There was stuff everywhere. The majority of it was a white particulate matter which quite frankly reminded me of cocaine (I've seen it in the movies, big "Scarface" fan!)

Here's the shocker: Those bulb/Rocket blowers don't do sh*t! Under the microscope, placing the end of the bulb almost right up to the matter, All the whisps of air in the world wouldn't budge it a 10th of a millimeter. Then to satisfy the most hardened of Forum members, I removed the camera from the surgical field turned it with sensor facing the ground (gravity on our side) and still couldn't remove the particles with the blower.

 

3) Next step, Arctic Butterfly. I have to admit I haven't treated the brush with the cleaning solution Visible Dust supplies, but I twirled and twirled the little brush gizmo before using.

Bottom line, I could watch the brush deposit more debris than it removed. I will clean the brush with their solvent and retry again at a later date.

 

4) There are basically two factors that influence my next assessment, wet cleaning. I used two products, Sensor Swab and the Visible Dust Swab. The VD swab seemed to do a much better job, I think because they are slightly stiffer. Also, the SS swab seemed to fray easier giving the illusion that they might leave debris (fibers) behind.

 

When it came to cleaning solutions, I had three products at hand. Sensor Clean and Smear Away (both made by Visible Dust). And finally Eclipse. Many camera shops in the US don't seem to sell Eclipse 2 anymore which I feel was the superior product.

A combination of the two VD products seemed to do the better job. I had an oil speck or two (glistening with a desaturated rainbow sheen like a street puddle after a winter rain). The Eclipse (again not E2) just seemed to allow the swab to push the particles from one end of the sensor to the other. I could never get it completely clean after spending 45 minutes on the job.

 

5) Several years ago I bought a product called SpeckGrabber Pro. You can see it in the first image. This product did nothing but leave goo all over my sensor which I then had to remove later with the Smear Away and a swab. In my hands, completely ineffective.

 

6) I finally had to be content with dragging most of the particles to the edge of the sensor using the wet clean/swab as stated in most of the product manual. But to remove a majority of the particles left behind, I then had to use the swab like a push broom and get them over the sensor edge. There seemed to be no other way.

 

Thoughts:

I think after doing the above procedure something I would like to try in the future is to use one of the sticky/tacky products like the woman uses on the Leica video. Again, I felt like I was just redistributing many of the particles over the sensor surface. My feeling is that I need a product that lifts the matter away from the sensor which in my mind may leave a residue behind (easily seen under the microscope) and then follow it up with a wet clean using Eclipse 2 or Smear Away and a sensor swab. We'll just have to see.

 

Anyway, I think that I am the first person I've seen in a public Forum cleaning a sensor under a microscope and quite surprised. Hopefully, other Forum members with access to such a device (especially with a camera) may be able to post their assessment as well.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[thrice]

Thankyou very much for the informative post William. I too have noticed most products don't really solve the problem.

 

I use eclipse e2 to pick up the grease, then I use a Pentax O-ICK1 to pick up the fluff and dust, seems to work well for me.

[jlam]

[ATTACH]186743[/ATTACH]

Thoughts:

I think after doing the above procedure something I would like to try in the future is to use one of the sticky/tacky products like the woman uses on the Leica video. Again, I felt like I was just redistributing many of the particles over the sensor surface. My feeling is that I need a product that lifts the matter away from the sensor which in my mind may leave a residue behind (easily seen under the microscope) and then follow it up with a wet clean using Eclipse 2 or Smear Away and a sensor swab. We'll just have to see.

 

Maybe the Dust-Aid Platinum is close to what you're looking for:

DUST-AID : Sensor Cleaning Products for DSLR Cameras

[Bo_Lorentzen]

William,

 

GREAT POST thank you.

 

Coincidentally there is a standard slur about leica owners that most are dentist, this might in fact turn out to be very useful.

 

I did some testing with the 75mm at min f.stop and so far for me the sticky options have worked best, at least they remove the big stuff, I have the dust-aid and the dlc sensor vu - both seems to work about the same in effectiveness, however the dust-aid is easier to get into the corners with because it is square, the sensor vu have rounded angled edges which was no problem in the M8 but makes it virtually impossible to use along the edge of the M9 sensor.

 

edit: Im using the dust-aid platinum, the case is very compact and it fits easily in a small zip lock bag to keep it clean and then stuffed in the corner of the camera bag, I got two of them from Amazon, thinking that it would be best to have a spare.

 

Looking forward to future updates on this.

[Guest WPalank]

Daniel,

I believe the Pentax product you use is the one in the Leica video. It looks like a good product.

 

Joseph and Bo,

The Dust-Aid product is the product to me in theory that really seems like it might work (similar concept to the Pentax system).

 

The only drawback I can think of is if any of the products leave behind a residue which would be easily spotted under the microscope. You see absolutely everything. I'll try to order both of the products in the week ahead.

 

It would be great if any fellow endodontists, microvascular surgeons, ophthalmologists or other professionals among us that use a surgical operating microscope in their daily procedures would attempt to put their own sensor cleaning system to work in their practices and report back.

[rob_w]

Very interesting Bill and, as you say, surprising that you seem to be the first person to take it to such a level of professional assessment. I hope you have the time and opportunity to follow-up your initial assessments and report back to us.

 

One thought: what does this examination say about the effectiveness of built-in dust removal systems which are based on vibration? I have always wondered if they can be effective if the 'dust' is as sticky as you describe. What do you think?

 

Thanks for taking the time

 

Robert

[k-hawinkler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for the great post. Just curious, what level of magnification is required to actually see what is happening during cleaning?

[250swb]

Very interesting Bill and, as you say, surprising that you seem to be the first person to take it to such a level of professional assessment. I hope you have the time and opportunity to follow-up your initial assessments and report back to us.

 

One thought: what does this examination say about the effectiveness of built-in dust removal systems which are based on vibration? I have always wondered if they can be effective if the 'dust' is as sticky as you describe. What do you think?

 

Thanks for taking the time

 

Robert

 

Built in dust removal systems, particularly those employed by Olympus and Panasonic (Super Sonic Wave Filter) are remarkable in their effectiveness. The added DOF inherent in the systems really does show up deposits on the sensor and in three years of using an Olympus E3 and other 4/3 and m4/3 cameras I have only had dust on the sensor once, on a very humid windy day. I have had oil, so a cleaning product is still needed from time to time.

 

That was a very interesting read William. I agree that none of the cleaning systems work very well on their own. I think the biggest problem is the dust that gets trapped around the edges, and the large swabs are useless at removing that. I now have an Arctic Butterfly, wet cleaning swabs, Rocket Blower, and a sticky Dust-Aid pad, but the only reliable way to get rid of dust is the spot healing brush in Photoshop.

 

Steve

[Nikkor AIS]

Bill: I have mixed feelings about your discoveries. It reminds me learning about all the "things" living on are skin, carpets, beds...OO. But I guess I got over that..., kind of .

I have two Nikon D3 and change my lenses a lot which is and have suspected what your results have confirmed for some time. Sticky tape seem like the way to go. it makes shooting film seem far more sanitary:). But thank you very much for taking the time to share your results. I know it will give my nightmares but I would love to see the dirty sensor before cleaning.

 

Gregory

[scc]

I checked mine out with our Zeiss Lumera operating microscope not so long ago, and did not notice that much more than when using my Visible Dust sensor loupe. The theatres are a good place for sensor cleaning because their positive pressure filtered air supply means it is essentially a dust free zone!

 

WPalank, are you an Ophthalmologist perchance?

[Steve Ash]

Wonderful post . Yeah, where are all the Leica dentists?

Now it is your turn to move from a job with lots of money but suffering from mouth odor into a scientific career:p

 

Regards

Steve

[thompsonkirk]

Thank you, William, for a seeries of useful experiments. But here's a question:

 

With my Arctic Butterfly & its loupe, I seem to be able to remove all of the dust-bunnies that show up in photographs. If I photograph the sky at f16 or 22, then I can see little bits of sensor crud. But when I'm actually shooting, I rarely stop down below f8, to avoid diffraction effects. In files at 100% magnification on my monitor, I can usually find little or nothing to fix with the Healing Brush.

 

So my question is: Are you checking to see how much of that microscopically-viewed crud is actually visible on your monitor or in prints?

 

Kirk

 

PS, I've been surprised re: how little sensor cleaning my Leicas need. With my 5D & earlier DSLRs, I changed lenses less often but saw more dust spots – as if the zoom lenses were sucking in every bit of dust they could find.

 

PPS, I noticed that Anders raised questions about the actual visibility of sensor crud in another thread:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/115028-dust-sensors-different-apertures.html

 

Kirk

[Guest WPalank]

One thought: what does this examination say about the effectiveness of built-in dust removal systems which are based on vibration? I have always wondered if they can be effective if the 'dust' is as sticky as you describe. What do you think?

Robert

 

Robert,

Unfortunately, I didn't have time to examine my Canon (responsible for the images above)

which was with me. I will book more time at a future date.

 

Thanks for the great post. Just curious, what level of magnification is required to actually see what is happening during cleaning?

1.0 for the initial cleaning, then I cranked it up to 2.5 for the smaller specs.

At 2.5 my field of view was slightly larger than 1/4-1/3 of the sensor surface to give you an idea. But the real plus in the equation is the amount of light you can get exactly where you want.

 

That was a very interesting read William. I agree that none of the cleaning systems work very well on their own. I think the biggest problem is the dust that gets trapped around the edges, and the large swabs are useless at removing that. I now have an Arctic Butterfly, wet cleaning swabs, Rocket Blower, and a sticky Dust-Aid pad, but the only reliable way to get rid of dust is the spot healing brush in Photoshop.

Steve

 

I agree Steve, it was the edges and corners that were near impossible. I plan on cleaning my AB in the near future with the VB cleaning product. But again, after multiple rotations of the twirling mechanism, it seemed to be depositing more debris than it was removing.

 

I checked mine out with our Zeiss Lumera operating microscope not so long ago, and did not notice that much more than when using my Visible Dust sensor loupe. The theatres are a good place for sensor cleaning because their positive pressure filtered air supply means it is essentially a dust free zone!

WPalank, are you an Ophthalmologist perchance?

 

Crank it up to 2.5 and tell me what you think next time. I have never used their sensor loupe. I would imagine there is some sort of distortion on the edges. There is zero distortion (to my eye) with the Carl Zeiss product. They're not inexpensive!

 

I was an endodontist (root canal specialist).

 

Bill: I have mixed feelings about your discoveries. It reminds me learning about all the "things" living on are skin, carpets, beds...OO. But I guess I got over that..., kind of .

Gregory

Gregory,

Exactly my thoughts once I figured out how to focus the microscope on the reflective Jerry Garcia hallucinogenic sensor surface. If I could see it, I felt the need to remove it. Sadly, I was unable to do so.

 

Thanks for contributing gang.

[diogenis]

Nice post there William!

I was certain that the rocket blower, in the end all it does is pollute and redistribute particles.

I also now hate VD products, both the butterfly which i only use as a brush to brush the dark box carefully, their loupe, certainly their fluid and maybe their swabs.

 

Dust aid platinum all the way!

[scc]

Crank it up to 2.5 and tell me what you think next time. I have never used their sensor loupe. I would imagine there is some sort of distortion on the edges. There is zero distortion (to my eye) with the Carl Zeiss product. They're not inexpensive!

 

Zeiss make the best operating microscopes IMO. I've used Zeiss and Leica scopes for surgery for the last 8 years or so, so I totally agree they are superb.

 

The Visible Dust Sensor Loupe does give a monocular view, and it has edge distortion for sure. It gives a 7x magnification however, and is super-portable. While I agree the optics of the Zeiss are clearly superior, the sensor loupe is far more useful (mainly because it fits in my bag), and equally as revealing, in my experience. Obviously with an OPMI you can see your results while you are working, something which most sensor loupes won't allow.

 

I did try my spectacle mounted 2.5x loupes and they were near useless in comparison, though better than the naked eye.

 

The main advantage of any OPMI vs. spectacle loupes is the coaxial light source, I suspect this is what gave the Zeiss the advantage for you.

[Guest WPalank]

So my question is: Are you checking to see how much of that microscopically-viewed crud is actually visible on your monitor or in prints?

 

Kirk

 

kirk,

First off my apologies. I was replying to the thread when you made your contribution and missed it.

 

Your question is valid. How much of this stuff actually makes a difference to the quality of the image we see on screen and or prints we produce? In short, I'm not sure. And I have not tested by shooting a stopped down image of a blue sky or blank wall.

 

But as an unfortunate consequence of my former profession; if I can see it and touch it (especially maddening), then why can't I remove it?

 

Nice post there William!

I was certain that the rocket blower, in the end all it does is pollute and redistribute particles.

I also now hate VD products, both the butterfly which i only use as a brush to brush the dark box carefully, their loupe, certainly their fluid and maybe their swabs.

 

Dust aid platinum all the way!

 

Actually, their swabs and solutions seem to work pretty well. Again I unscientifically attribute this to the stiffness.

 

The Visible Dust Sensor Loupe does give a monocular view, and it has edge distortion for sure. It gives a 7x magnification however, and is super-portable. While I agree the optics of the Zeiss are clearly superior, the sensor loupe is far more useful (mainly because it fits in my bag), and equally as revealing, in my experience. Obviously with an OPMI you can see your results while you are working, something which most sensor loupes won't allow.

 

I did try my spectacle mounted 2.5x loupes and they were near useless in comparison, though better than the naked eye.

 

The main advantage of any OPMI vs. spectacle loupes is the coaxial light source, I suspect this is what gave the Zeiss the advantage for you.

 

scc,

Good to have someone with experience chiming in. I had no idea the magnification was 7x. But as you mentioned, the advantage to the microscope is the ability to view the area while being able to work on it rather than jumping back and forth.

 

I agree, the light source gives it it's biggest advantage as opposed to the magnification.

[diogenis]

The real problem with the VD loupe, besides the fact its a cheap plastic lens, is that you have to place it on camera in an on-off fashion.

Also do notice, that we are not interested for every other molecule of dust, because even if the sensor glass is close to the sensor, it still has distance for the smallest particles to project shadow on its surface.

William, If you find your way under the microscope again, try using the swabs with the solutions, with several varied pressure levels. I have found out that only the lightest pressure applied gives good results. Otherwise it just leaves a film residue. Also maybe pressure is the reason for leaving particles in the edges of the glass.

I'm really curious about how the platinum sticky silicon against the pentax one will perform...

[Bo_Lorentzen]

BTW... for what it is worth, I googled the pentax sticky thingie today. as far as I can tell from all the pictures, the pentax and the sensor VU sensor cleaner is the same product, they are identical. The sensor VU is like a block of cast sticky material the problem is that the corners are rounded, it was good on the M8 but not on the corners of the M9.

 

I actually like the sticky effect of the pentax/sensorVU thingie, it feels better on the sensor, however so far the dust aid platinum is better of getting out to the corners of the sensor.

 

The rounded corners is probably because it is cast, sharp corners tend to break on flexible rubbery castings, so the rounding is a design compromise based on the materials to prevent small rubber parts on the sensor.

 

.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Anguish]

One would think the inventors of this technology - sensors - would also have come up with a simple maintenance solution before distributing their products.

Blowing and swabbing would seem only to redistribute dust and crud, sometimes in a random way. Isn't it logical to seek a cleaner that removes dust and crud from the interior of the camera?

Like a mini vacuum. Lacking that, the Dust aid, or a similar tool, seems to be the sensible way to secure the offending particles and remove them from the sensor environment.

[carcam]

Hi William- nice to see another good use for the scope besides finding calcified canals. I posted a similar thread at dpreview last March and it's amazing and scary just how much junk you can see under magnification. I found what worked best for me was carefully using compressed air to blow the dust around (and hopefully out) the the Sensor Swabs with Eclipse 2 solution. You'll miss a good meeting in San Diego this April.