stephengv Posted July 5, 2017 Share #1 Posted July 5, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Has anyone tried this? Is this really made by B+W? Thank you. Here is a link from Leica Rumors https://leicarumors.com/2016/04/26/this-bw-uv-pro-premium-device-should-prevent-lens-fungus-leica-mount-compatible.aspx/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 5, 2017 Posted July 5, 2017 Hi stephengv, Take a look here B+W UV-PRO Premium Anti-Fungus Light. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Ecar Posted July 5, 2017 Share #2 Posted July 5, 2017 Interesting... Light therapy for lenses suffering from depression from lack of use... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengv Posted July 5, 2017 Author Share #3 Posted July 5, 2017 Interesting... Light therapy for lenses suffering from depression from lack of use... Hahaha that's funny. On a serious note, I live in a tropical country where it gets very humid. I think of adding this as an additional protection, aside from my "dry cabinet", against fungus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted July 5, 2017 Share #4 Posted July 5, 2017 Pricey little devil too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted July 5, 2017 Share #5 Posted July 5, 2017 Hahaha that's funny. On a serious note, I live in a tropical country where it gets very humid. I think of adding this as an additional protection, aside from my "dry cabinet", against fungus. Understood. Makes sense. I stick to silica gel when needed, but don't live in a humid climate. I know that others have put their lenses under UV light to remove yellow casting or indeed try to kill fungus. But that seemed to be a longer (days) undertaking. Two minutes seems very short. IIRC, the UV light source also needs to be pretty strong as the glass absorbs a lot of it. Not sure about that B+W "affiliation" either... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengv Posted July 5, 2017 Author Share #6 Posted July 5, 2017 Pricey little devil too. Yes its pricey. But, I saw one on ebay for 120 USD though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted July 6, 2017 Share #7 Posted July 6, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) not pricy considering repair cost. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengv Posted July 6, 2017 Author Share #8 Posted July 6, 2017 not pricy considering repair cost. You're right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengv Posted July 6, 2017 Author Share #9 Posted July 6, 2017 Do you think UV Light will damage the lens? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted July 6, 2017 Share #10 Posted July 6, 2017 UV light has been used for years to clear up brown thorium lenses, mostly those wonderful Pentax 50/1.4 from the 1960s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted July 6, 2017 Share #11 Posted July 6, 2017 Sunlight has plenty of UV, but less reaches us as the humidity increases (water absorbs UV) and it's free. So the best way to not get fungus is to use the equipment regularly. There are other cheaper sources of UV light too. You could get a UV water sanitiser and put it on the lens covered by aluminium foil (you don't want to get the dose). It'd be cheaper and you can use it for water too! In the end it's just a UV LED and a cover to stop the light escaping. Looks to be battery powered too so it can't be putting out that much power. I would have thought that by now lens manufacturers would have included an anti fungal agent on their coatings... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted July 6, 2017 Share #12 Posted July 6, 2017 That goes against all the principles of built-in obsolescence Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 6, 2017 Share #13 Posted July 6, 2017 ... uses UV light to kill bacterias That is "interesting", given that fungus is caused by...fungi, not bacteria. (where did that s come from?) Snake oil, if you ask me. The way to kill fungus by UV light is to expose the lens for a longer period of time, not a few seconds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted July 6, 2017 Share #14 Posted July 6, 2017 The way to kill fungus by UV light is to expose the lens for a longer period of time, not a few seconds. It's actually total accumulated dose that kills the fungus. You need to deliver the right number of photons, either with a very short high intensity burst, or a weak source with a long exposure. In reality it's better to deliver the dose quickly, so the organism doesn't have enough time to repair itself before the next photon hits it. The long and slow approach comes from yesteryear when high intensity UV sources were confined to large scale science facilities. (I'm currently putting the finishing touches on a paper about X-ray induced radiation damage on small organisms with several different preparation methods - it's pretty complicated when you get deep into it) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted July 6, 2017 Share #15 Posted July 6, 2017 Is this really made by B+W? I doubt it. Does anybody know for sure? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 6, 2017 Share #16 Posted July 6, 2017 I wouldn't put it past them. They peddled a Photoshop "Polaroid filter" plugin some years ago. Couldn't work. Didn't work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 6, 2017 Share #17 Posted July 6, 2017 It's actually total accumulated dose that kills the fungus. You need to deliver the right number of photons, either with a very short high intensity burst, or a weak source with a long exposure. In reality it's better to deliver the dose quickly, so the organism doesn't have enough time to repair itself before the next photon hits it. The long and slow approach comes from yesteryear when high intensity UV sources were confined to large scale science facilities. (I'm currently putting the finishing touches on a paper about X-ray induced radiation damage on small organisms with several different preparation methods - it's pretty complicated when you get deep into it) quite true, but this being a low intensity battery driven light it would need a lot of time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted July 6, 2017 Share #18 Posted July 6, 2017 quite true, but this being a low intensity battery driven light it would need a lot of time. Most likely, but being an LED it *could* be quite efficient at emitting light at a narrow wavelength band, but they give no information about the wavelength range or the LED intensity. Also, it gives a wavelength of less than 300nm and a time of 2 min after which the unit shuts off. Given glass transmits roughly sweet f-all at wavelengths less than 300nm I'd be concerned by the time, especially for lenses with a lot of glass. But hey, at US$350 I'm not going to use it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted July 6, 2017 Share #19 Posted July 6, 2017 Do you think UV Light will damage the lens? I had the rear group from a 35mm Summicron v.4 re-cemented after it had delaminated a couple of years ago. The friend who got this done for me is fortunate in having access to a specialist lab (long story but they really do know what they are doing and produce very exotic and expensive lens systems for highly specialised users). The comment which came back was that they had had to use a high dose of UV to cure the cement due to the high UV absorption of the glass in this rear group. So whilst I doubt damage (although earlier, balsam cemented lenses may be a concern if UV affects balsam?) I'd also very much doubt any beneficial effect at low dosage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soden Posted July 6, 2017 Share #20 Posted July 6, 2017 But hey, at US$350 I'm not going to use it. True at $350 no, but at $120 I'll give it a shot. I have one on order. The big question is how to prove its effectiveness. It's easy to prove if it's a failure, but success, that's more difficult. The question of authenticity, I'll judge on build quality, when it arrives. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.