According to the Canon white paper on this camera, this camera's
sensor is fronted by a dichroic filter. This implies the filtering
coating is on the front of the sensor's coverglass. If this is the
case, the coating on the glass could be softer than normal glass.
Much of the dust we have in the air is quartz, which is much harder
than regular glass and harder still than any optical coating.
Cleaning it should be a process of removing as much dust as possible
with air pressure rather than initially using a swab initially which
could "drag" dust particles across the surface, sleeking or scratching
the coating. It's not clear whether the coating is on the outside
or inside of the glass cover. However, some kind of anti-reflection
coating is likely on the outside of the cover if the dichroic coating
is on the backside and even anti-reflection coatings must be treated
more carefully than glass.
The process should be what it is with all precision optics;
1. Blow off as much particulate matter as possible.
2. Use a soft brush to carefully remove any adhering via static
charges.
3. Use a cleaning solution and a swab as a last resort.
Also, material that makes it way onto the coating other than dry dust
(organic particles, whatever) can contain an acidic component that
can permanently etch or degrade coatings. That should be removed
immediately.
--Rich
G.T. - 18 Dec 2005 22:17 GMT
> According to the Canon white paper on this camera, this camera's
> sensor is fronted by a dichroic filter. This implies the filtering
> coating is on the front of the sensor's coverglass. If this is the
> case, the coating on the glass could be softer than normal glass.
> Much of the dust we have in the air is quartz, which is much harder
> than regular glass and harder still than any optical coating.
Typical alarmist and/or Canon-bashing troll by the Dick. Since 99% of
dust can be removed with minimal air pressure and the other 1% that
might by sticky is probably also soft, who cares?
Greg

Signature
"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late
The battles we fought were long and hard
Just not to be consumed by rock and roll" - The Mekons
Rich - 20 Dec 2005 03:22 GMT
>> According to the Canon white paper on this camera, this camera's
>> sensor is fronted by a dichroic filter. This implies the filtering
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
>Greg
Some people have stated they do not blow the dust because they
believe it simply re-distributes it throughout the camera. That's one
issue.
-Rich
Randall Ainsworth - 18 Dec 2005 22:32 GMT
> According to the Canon white paper on this camera, this camera's
> sensor is fronted by a dichroic filter. This implies the filtering
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> can permanently etch or degrade coatings. That should be removed
> immediately.
What do you care? You don't own any kind of camera.
Rich - 20 Dec 2005 03:23 GMT
>> According to the Canon white paper on this camera, this camera's
>> sensor is fronted by a dichroic filter. This implies the filtering
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
>What do you care? You don't own any kind of camera.
No, you are right. I use a camera obscura and leave it exposing until
the image someone infuses itself onto plain paper.
-Rich
Gormless - 19 Dec 2005 18:47 GMT
> According to the Canon white paper on this camera, this camera's
Get a camera. See what happens for your very own self.
Rich - 20 Dec 2005 03:24 GMT
>> According to the Canon white paper on this camera, this camera's
>
>Get a camera. See what happens for your very own self.
PPSSSSTTTTT: "Canon attack group, you have your target, ENGAGE!!!"
PPPSSTTTTTT: "Roger that, sir!"
Gormless - 20 Dec 2005 18:33 GMT
> PPSSSSTTTTT: "Canon attack group, you have your target, ENGAGE!!!"
> PPPSSTTTTTT: "Roger that, sir!"
I admire your apparently indestructibly thick skin.
Of the three replies to your post no fewer than three of them were negative
towards you.
This is nothing new with respect to your timelessly fascinating postings to
this group.
Why don't you just take the hint and stay in rec.playthings.lego or
alt.clueless.twats or wherever it is you'd fit?
Rich - 21 Dec 2005 03:06 GMT
>> PPSSSSTTTTT: "Canon attack group, you have your target, ENGAGE!!!"
>> PPPSSTTTTTT: "Roger that, sir!"
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>Why don't you just take the hint and stay in rec.playthings.lego or
>alt.clueless.twats or wherever it is you'd fit?
Because this isn't rec.photo.canonlovers, at least not yet.
I never tell people where to go on the net, (unlike your dictatorial
little leftist self) but IMO, you and others would be far happier at
fredmiranda.com or one of the dedicated Canon sites.
-Rich