Jump to content

Please Leica: give us a dust removal system on the M9


biglouis

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A different ideal of simplicity: simplicity is when you do nothing and the (self-cleaning) sensor is clean. Complexity is cleaning your sensor manually and/or cleaning up little dust spots with Photoshop. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't think I've spent an hour total on cleaning my M8 sensor in more than two years. Some basic safeguards help: Don't leave the camera on when changing lenses; keep the rear elements and bayonets clean on your lenses; when outdoors, shield the camera from wind when changing lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A different ideal of simplicity: simplicity is when you do nothing and the (self-cleaning) sensor is clean. Complexity is cleaning your sensor manually and/or cleaning up little dust spots with Photoshop. :)

 

Well, you do have a point (and shoot?) there, but the dust shakers, while they do work reasonably well (I've had them on several cameras including the Olympus E-1 and the D700) they are still not going to stop it from being a thing that has to be done.

 

Much has to do with what conditions one shoots. When I shot the AMA motorsports I took the E-1 along twice just for the heck of it. I had to clean the sensor manually because I thought I didn't have to worry and use my normal way of changing lenses. In fact the first day I had no issues with my 1Dmk2 but had to sit there map out two dust bunnies ... no not bunnies ... these were more like gorillas from about 800 shots. Bad luck. Probably ...and not much in the way of scientific testing, I know ... but the point is that these things are a mere convenience.

 

The convenience costs. It costs money and moving parts always break sooner or later. The less the better is my choice of two evils. All of these bodies also have much more space in there. They also have an strong anti alias filter in front and I believe that is what gets the shake treatment.

 

Is it really that hard to clean a sensor? It takes me literally five minutes to do a good job and I did it about four times a season on average. Not a big deal for me ... and I worked in super dusty conditions and had to work fast, and so carelessly.

 

The M8 has to be the easiest access there ever was, so I'd rather put my wishes towards continuing Leicas reputation of longevity rather than feature creep. Heck ... what next? I don't think Leica can compete with Nikon and Canon this way ... so I hope they stick to their core competencies.

 

Oh ... btw ... my way of cleaning was always to wrap lens tissue around Q-tips and swipe in one direction towards the corners. It worked as well as any of the kits and was very fast, three minutes to five minutes max. I think my focusing on a Leica will take longer than that. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always wondered about the sensor on thing that people say. I wonder if it really makes a difference? I often didn't bother and did not find any difference that I could quantify. There is a light tight shutter in the way so any charge seems to me to be unlikely to contribute - is my thinking. I always think that the dust left in the mirror box is the culprit - but I don't know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you want dust removal.

 

Have you investigated whether it would take up more space?

 

Have you asked if it will make the camera bigger?

 

Are you going to come back and complain that it made the camera bigger?

 

Should we continue this discussion or drop it now?

 

M

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always wondered about the sensor on thing that people say. I wonder if it really makes a difference? I often didn't bother and did not find any difference that I could quantify. There is a light tight shutter in the way so any charge seems to me to be unlikely to contribute - is my thinking. I always think that the dust left in the mirror box is the culprit - but I don't know.

 

Leaving the camera turned on means there is a positive charge on the sensor surface. Dust particles are negatively charged. Simple physics would tell anyone the result. I'm not sure how you can say you didn't find any difference when there is no way for you to tell how much less dust might have ended up on your sensor had you turned the camera off when changing lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A different ideal of simplicity: simplicity is when you do nothing and the (self-cleaning) sensor is clean. Complexity is cleaning your sensor manually and/or cleaning up little dust spots with Photoshop. :)

Yep. But it won't be clean, just a little bit less prone to dust spots....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes fotografr, up to that point it makes sense, except for the little fact that when you have the camera on, and you go to change lenses, the shutter, which is light tight .... is closed. So how does the dust get in due to the positive/negative charge when the door to the outside word is closed much more effectively than due to the seal of a lens on the body while one is taking pictures.

 

Also .... can someone offer proof that there is a charge and that it reaches through the microlens surface and filter in front of the sensor? Or could that part be a neat sounding internet based urban legend. I don't know, and its only of academic interest that I bring it up (don't mean to be argumentative) I know that many surfaces that carry a charge also keep the charge persistent for a period of time once the device is turned on. Could that be a factor? Lastly ... that dang dust bunny would have to be pretty much touching the surface already for such a weak field to suck them in. Is it positive - dust is negative? :)

 

Interesting topic though. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you want dust removal.

 

Have you investigated whether it would take up more space?

 

No. It might take up more space, but there might be more space available.

 

Have you asked if it will make the camera bigger?

 

No. It might not make the exterior dimensions of the camera any bigger.

 

Are you going to come back and complain that it made the camera bigger?

 

Not if it didn't make the camera any bigger.

 

Should we continue this discussion or drop it now?

 

M

 

No. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes fotografr, up to that point it makes sense, except for the little fact that when you have the camera on, and you go to change lenses, the shutter, which is light tight .... is closed. So how does the dust get in due to the positive/negative charge when the door to the outside word is closed much more effectively than due to the seal of a lens on the body while one is taking pictures.

 

Also .... can someone offer proof that there is a charge and that it reaches through the microlens surface and filter in front of the sensor? Or could that part be a neat sounding internet based urban legend. I don't know, and its only of academic interest that I bring it up (don't mean to be argumentative) I know that many surfaces that carry a charge also keep the charge persistent for a period of time once the device is turned on. Could that be a factor? Lastly ... that dang dust bunny would have to be pretty much touching the surface already for such a weak field to suck them in. Is it positive - dust is negative? :)

 

Interesting topic though. :)

It may be a myth, but I do turn the camera off when changing lenses. I did the sensor with the Arctic Butterfly in January, last week I had two dust spots to remove. That was two puffs with the Rocket Blower, three seconds when I changed lenses anyway. Spotlessly clean again. The camera is in daily use. So it works for me and I am viewing this whole thread with utter amazement - much to do about nothing....What dust?:rolleyes::confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes fotografr, up to that point it makes sense, except for the little fact that when you have the camera on, and you go to change lenses, the shutter, which is light tight .... is closed. So how does the dust get in due to the positive/negative charge when the door to the outside word is closed much more effectively than due to the seal of a lens on the body while one is taking pictures.

 

Also .... can someone offer proof that there is a charge and that it reaches through the microlens surface and filter in front of the sensor? Or could that part be a neat sounding internet based urban legend. I don't know, and its only of academic interest that I bring it up (don't mean to be argumentative) I know that many surfaces that carry a charge also keep the charge persistent for a period of time once the device is turned on. Could that be a factor? Lastly ... that dang dust bunny would have to be pretty much touching the surface already for such a weak field to suck them in. Is it positive - dust is negative? :)

 

Interesting topic though. :)

 

You may accept or reject any of this advice. It doesn't really matter to me one way or the other. However, it is commonly accepted practice to turn off the camera when changing lenses, and there are good reasons for it.

 

Read: Photojojo Sensor Dust Is Evil. Here’s How to Banish It.

 

Maybe your experience is different. But if you jump off a two story building and don't break any bones, that doesn't qualify you to advise others they can do the same thing with the same result.

 

I've been involved with digital photography for over 10 years and have owned more than 15 different interchangeable lens digital cameras during that time. In an effort to minimize my problems I've read a considerable number of opinions from people whose advice I respect about how to prevent sensor dust. I am merely passing that along here in an effort to try to help someone who is having a problem with sensor dust. I see no reason for someone to come along, "not being argumentative here," and take exception to this advice with nothing more than a few unscientific suppositions. What exactly is your point in doing that?

 

If you need a step-by-step explanation, follow this:

 

--Camera on, sensor positively charged.

--Lens off, negatively charged dust particles are attracted to the sensor chamber.

--Shutter released, curtain opens, negatively charged dust particles in chamber attach to positively charged sensor.

 

Easy enough? If you're having trouble with the notion that the sensor, an electrical device, is positively charged and that dust particles are negatively charged--do a bit of research before coming back to the discussion. http://carrillo.uwaterloo.ca/sci206/pdfs/lecture-8.pdf

Edited by fotografr
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I will go along photografr. But do tell me ... how the idea of the shutter gets explained away.

You will agree I think, that the shutter seal light away from the film/sensor, right? So ... how is the dust going to get past?

 

But I guess I should not rock any boats, I'm sure all those reliable sources did some kind of research. How does one research that? What evidence is there that this attraction goes through glass? I have a degree in physics and I always thought that glass was an insulator. Silly me. :)

 

As for credentials ... I've been in digital since 97, a track photographer for waay too many years (fashion before that ... but that was film) and have owned about twice that number of cameras.

... But I'd hate to be argumentative. :D Since you asked what my point was - it was to ask for what lies behind the conventional wisdom. You may be right, but it doesn't hurt to wonder since much seems to not add up.

cheers.

Edited by PavelDerka
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I will go along photografr. But do tell me ... how the idea of the shutter gets explained away.

You will agree I think, that the shutter seal light away from the film/sensor, right? So ... how is the dust going to get past?

 

At the risk of being redundant, please refer to the step-by-step I posted prior to your response. I'm certainly glad you don't want to be argumentative. That could get boring.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will agree I think, that the shutter seal light away from the film/sensor, right? So ... how is the dust going to get past?

 

Hmmm. A developer tank lid keeps light away from the film in the racks or reels. How does the developer (and other chemicals) get in and out of the tank? (BTW -- some shutters are not fully light-tight. There are actually two shutters on a C/V 35mm RF camera. The main shutter is a 35mm SLR shutter which is additionally shielded from light by the mirror in its original application. It proved not light-tight enough for film RF duty.) (And even if we could build an airtight camera shutter capable of operating at several frames per second at a speed in excess of 1/125 -- would we want to?)

 

I have a degree in physics and I always thought that glass was an insulator. Silly me. :)

 

Another Hmmm. What about that tin oxide stuff on the sensor? And how does the dust stick to my glass TV tube, even after I unplug the set? As I understand it, even things well known as insulators (glass, plastic, rubber) can build up a static charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well .... as I said ... I could have it all wrong. I haven't had dust problems to worry me though I have had dust from time to time with all cameras. The dust shaker technology works, but it is not perfect, and I wonder about the long term effects of putting in things that vibrate faster than an electric razor into a Leica.

 

Mostly though, aside from keeping it simple, I think that the M8 looks to be about the easiest of all cameras to take a swab to.

 

(tv's btw have an extraordinarily strong field (one that can kill even long after that tv is turned off) ... and it lasts for a long time ... but .. that isn't the point of the tread ... so I'm belaboring the point (sorry)

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. But it won't be clean, just a little bit less prone to dust spots....

Those are broad assumptions. They depend on the cleaning system, the camera, and the photographer's environment, needs and perceptions. In my experience with dslrs, a good self-cleaning sensor makes a real difference. And I don't need absolutely clean. An architectural photographer who commonly shoots at small apertures may have a stricter standard. A busy photographer or studio with multiple cameras will value any time savings, especially when the time between shoots is tight and retouching time is costly. Also, when photographing clients' once-in-a-lifetime events, the fact that the sensor gets a cleaning every time the camera is switched on and off adds an extra little bit of assurance that debris will not get stuck on the sensor while the camera is in its bag or during a lens change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You clean filters and optics of lenses. You also need to clean the optical surface of the sensor. So what. When I was in Mexico earlier this year I got a lot of dust on the sensor and had no Butterfly or widgets of any sort available. I took some alcohol and my wife's q-tips and cleaned the glass surface just fine. Few days later there was a couple of spots and I used my breath and the q-tip again. It is just thin glass. In a few years I'll throw the camera away and start over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...