jaapv Posted July 16 Share #41 Posted July 16 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thank you. The table in that article shows that there is no risk of thermal retina damage beyond 1200 nm. Car LiDAR works at 1550 nm, well clear. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/423030-lidar-damage/?do=findComment&comment=5834479'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 16 Posted July 16 Hi jaapv, Take a look here LiDAR damage. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted July 16 Share #42 Posted July 16 To sidetrack the discussion: neutron damage to sensors is well documented and not uncommon. (Dead pixels and pixel lines) However, even if intense neutron irradiation ( like in outer space) will have a negative effect on the human retina and rats in laboratory experiments, in normal daily situations there is no danger. This suggests that photographic sensors are far more vulnerable to radiation damage than the human eye. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted July 16 Share #43 Posted July 16 An interesting observation in that article is that if self driving car LiDAR damages cameras, it will also potentially damage the cameras of the other self-driving cars (and presumably any cars with cameras), not to mention surveillance cameras, traffic cameras, police cameras and so on. I imagine they will work this one out, as thankfully it is not only the photo community that might be affected. Cameras are far more ubiquitous and important than self-driving cars for any number of uses, so if there are a bunch of camera killing machines going around I am sure there will be a push to mitigate that problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted July 16 Share #44 Posted July 16 5 hours ago, jaapv said: To sidetrack the discussion: neutron damage to sensors is well documented and not uncommon. (Dead pixels and pixel lines) However, even if intense neutron irradiation ( like in outer space) will have a negative effect on the human retina and rats in laboratory experiments, in normal daily situations there is no danger. This suggests that photographic sensors are far more vulnerable to radiation damage than the human eye. I am very curious why camera sensor is more vulnerable. Perhaps because it is much thiner? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted July 16 Share #45 Posted July 16 6 hours ago, jaapv said: It is not blocked by the lens… I suppose you only venture out of the house wearing a blindfold? If the (LiDAR) light does not reach retina, then it is blocked by someting. By block I mean reflect or deflect or absorb. For opened eyes, what can block the light? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica_kh Posted July 16 Share #46 Posted July 16 Is there a safe distance for sensor safety from LiDAR and will the sensor be safe so long as it's not in a direct line of sight of the LiDAR? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 16 Share #47 Posted July 16 Advertisement (gone after registration) 21 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said: If the (LiDAR) light does not reach retina, then it is blocked by someting. By block I mean reflect or deflect or absorb. For opened eyes, what can block the light? The ocular fluid is opaque to the frequency. As is it is by far the largest mass in the eye it will not heat up to a harmful degree. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 16 Share #48 Posted July 16 1 hour ago, Einst_Stein said: I am very curious why camera sensor is more vulnerable. Perhaps because it is much thiner? Silicon is the answer. Neutrons will impact much stronger. To illustrate the effect of a Neutron impact on Silicate, here you can see one striking a beach and hitting grains of sand. It is absolutely the most decisive moment photo ever taken and I took it quite by accident, an x-million to 1 chance. M9M. 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! 5 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/423030-lidar-damage/?do=findComment&comment=5834602'>More sharing options...
ronaldc Posted July 17 Author Share #49 Posted July 17 9 hours ago, jaapv said: Silicon is the answer. Neutrons will impact much stronger. To illustrate the effect of a Neutron impact on Silicate, here you can see one striking a beach and hitting grains of sand. It is absolutely the most decisive moment photo ever taken and I took it quite by accident, an x-million to 1 chance. M9M. 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! Holy crikey that is insane, I hope you printed and framed that. i saw the STC anti LiDAR filter smallest is 58mm but it’s equivalent to ND4, a step up ring would work, but then I won’t be able to fit the hood on the Noctilux. This is a real pain and big worry for us M11 users who roam the cities. Sensor is exposed all the time while it’s turned on. Would be very hard to protect it from stray LiDAR. Leica haven’t expected this danger, perhaps the M12 will have protection. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted July 17 Share #50 Posted July 17 Lidar is doomed anyway. It probably won’t be used in automotive applications much longer. Too expensive and complex. The camera method that Tesla uses is sure to take over. Simpler. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted July 17 Share #51 Posted July 17 3 hours ago, ronaldc said: Holy crikey that is insane, I hope you printed and framed that. i saw the STC anti LiDAR filter smallest is 58mm but it’s equivalent to ND4, a step up ring would work, but then I won’t be able to fit the hood on the Noctilux. This is a real pain and big worry for us M11 users who roam the cities. Sensor is exposed all the time while it’s turned on. Would be very hard to protect it from stray LiDAR. Leica haven’t expected this danger, perhaps the M12 will have protection. And all mirrorless? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronaldc Posted July 17 Author Share #52 Posted July 17 5 hours ago, Einst_Stein said: And all mirrorless? Well yeah, however there are some drop in filters made for Sony bodies. They fit into sensor and then you attach lens Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 17 Share #53 Posted July 17 Yeah, well, we all know what filters in front of a sensor do to M mount cameras... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted July 17 Share #54 Posted July 17 34 minutes ago, ronaldc said: Well yeah, however there are some drop in filters made for Sony bodies. They fit into sensor and then you attach lens Why? why not on lens or on sensor? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
beewee Posted July 19 Share #55 Posted July 19 (edited) It doesn’t have to be LiDAR specifically that cause damage. It also doesn’t have to be infrared either. Any laser with sufficient energy can fry the amplifier and/or analog to digital converter circuit on the pixel/sensor. The laser diode on the iPhone Pro and Apple Vision Pro are pretty low power. They have a range of around 5-10m. Car Lidars come in a variety of power levels with ranges from 15-50m for corner mounted units often used in autonomous vehicles to 100-300m for forward facing units. These are 10-60x stronger than the ones in the iphone. There’s still an upper limit to what can be mounted on a car since they need to be eye-safe if it is to operate in a public environment. On 7/17/2025 at 7:21 AM, jdlaing said: Lidar is doomed anyway. It probably won’t be used in automotive applications much longer. Too expensive and complex. The camera method that Tesla uses is sure to take over. Simpler. They are indeed very expensive and they have limitations with rain, snow, and fog which causes back scatter. Dirt on the front cover also degrades the performance. They have many of the same limitations as normal cameras. The future likely lies with low cost thermal imaging sensors and radar sensors that can see through rain, snow, and fog for collision avoidance, along with more conventional high dynamic range color sensor cameras for context and object detection. Beyond cost, lidars are very difficult to integrate from an industrial design perspective, especially if 360 coverage is required so design centric automakers like BMW, AUDI, Mercedes, etc are reluctant to use them. They prefer radars which can be seamlessly integrated behind optically opaque body panels that looks like just a normal panel. Edited July 19 by beewee 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwidad Posted July 23 Share #56 Posted July 23 (edited) Interesting concerns. The experts claim as long as the emitter meets a regulatory standard they do not damage your eyes! My question is who is checking! everything I read suggest to me that sensor damage like this is a bit like burning hole in shutter curtain. having said that I have shot at some impressive laser lighted concerts and had no issues yet. Edited July 23 by kiwidad Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now