M9 – A Giant Leap in the Right Direction – Still Some Distance To Go

[ulrikft]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Diogenis assured me over and over that a self-cleaning sensor is pointless /QUOTE]

Dust on the sensor in ALL digital cameras is the elephant in the cupboard SFAIAC. Everyone sees the dust, everyone has to deal with, everyone accepts it but no one talks about it as something that has to resolved. IMHO all sensors need a fundamental redesign in their technology to repel dust, not attract it. Nikon, Canon etc have 'work rounds' to minimise dust and its effect (well documented) rather than getting back to the fundamental design so it is never an issue no matter how often you change a lens.

 

Nikon have made a patent in that direction recently, with a membrane that closes when you remove a lens. I'll try to dig it up.

[Advertisement]

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

[fotografr]

Dust on the sensor in ALL digital cameras is the elephant in the cupboard SFAIAC. Everyone sees the dust, everyone has to deal with, everyone accepts it but no one talks about it as something that has to resolved. IMHO all sensors need a fundamental redesign in their technology to repel dust, not attract it. Nikon, Canon etc have 'work rounds' to minimise dust and its effect (well documented) rather than getting back to the fundamental design so it is never an issue no matter how often you change a lens.

 

It hasn't been resolved throughout the entire film era. Print spotting was a fact of life for me from the day I processed my first roll, and I kept about as clean a darkroom as one could keep--air filtration system, exhaust fans, filtered air louvres, electrostatic film brushes. The worst were the chromogenic films, which seemed to suck dust particles from the air to their surface like a magnet. As long as there is dust in the air, there will be dust on film and sensors. By comparison, the small amount of dust I occasionally get on my sensors is not an issue.

[Jamie Roberts]

Do you count Visoflex lenses as M lenses? I have nice 200mm, 280mm, 400mm and 560mm Telyt lens setups (lens heads with focussing mounts) that were made by Leica exlcusively for use on M cameras.

 

{snipped}

 

Obviously, from my earlier reply, I don't even count 90mm M lenses as teles, let alone the whole Visioflex thing. Zlatko caught me fair and square on that (though in truth my brain still thinks of IS and telephoto is medium or longer lenses, not a 90 or even 135 lengths )

[dalippe]

No it is not equal with Leicas. You wet clean the sensor a couple of times and then you forget about dustbunnies. I don't know how you do it with your Nikons but this is what happens with my M8

 

Not my experience at all. I have to clean my M8s as often as my DSLRs. And why wouldn't it be this way? Is there something about the design of the M8 that would lead you to expect a difference? Do you often shoot at very small apertures? If not, you won't notice the dust.

[diogenis]

Not my experience at all. I have to clean my M8s as often as my DSLRs. And why wouldn't it be this way? Is there something about the design of the M8 that would lead you to expect a difference? Do you often shoot at very small apertures? If not, you won't notice the dust.

 

I follow some very simple rules: changing lenses very fast, and when I do, camera opening is facing down. Less moving parts (mirror, gears, blowers... yes Nikon uses blowers..., dust collectors and god knows what else) might result in this. Better overall quality and tighter tolerances might also be another reason.

 

In any case if you gather dust you have to remove it. It won't get away by sweeping it under the carpet. I'm sure we can all understand this