 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / June 2007Dust = non-issue
I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty conditions: http://gallery.photo.net/photo/6053275-lg.jpg http://gallery.photo.net/photo/4251863-lg.jpg http://gallery.photo.net/photo/6040471-md.jpg I've cleaned it twice in 2 years, the first time it had about 7 noticeable spots, this time it had about 12. Both times it only took a blower to clean it. What the hell is wrong with RichA's brain? Greg  SignatureTicketbastard tax tracker: http://ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html Dethink to survive - Mclusky > I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty > conditions: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Greg .........but do you chnge lenses? Marcel >> I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty >> conditions: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > .........but do you chnge lenses? > Marcel All the time. During the long weekend when I took the shadow and cross pictures I changed often between my 35mm f/2, 24-135mm, 10-22mm, and 100mm macro. Greg > > .........but do you chnge lenses? > > Marcel > > All the time. During the long weekend when I took the shadow and cross > pictures I changed often between my 35mm f/2, 24-135mm, 10-22mm, and > 100mm macro. Yes, but the dry desert air is not home to the dust we see on sensors. Try shooting outdoors in the spring when pollen fills the air, or indoors where the carpet dust and lint is everywhere. Signaturem-m >>> .........but do you chnge lenses? >>> Marcel [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Try shooting outdoors in the spring when pollen fills the air, or > indoors where the carpet dust and lint is everywhere. Oh, there was tons of pollen here last weekend: http://homepage.mac.com/getosx/mcgill/gore_sm.jpg Greg > > Yes, but the dry desert air is not home to the dust we see on sensors. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > http://homepage.mac.com/getosx/mcgill/gore_sm.jpg I'd like to see a photo of the cloudless sky at f/32. Signaturem-m >>> Yes, but the dry desert air is not home to the dust we see on sensors. >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I'd like to see a photo of the cloudless sky at f/32. After that weekend was my second cleaning in the last 2 years. 13 spots. Gone with a few puffs of air. Greg > I'd like to see a photo of the cloudless sky at f/32. ... art connaisseur? Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > > I'd like to see a photo of the cloudless sky at f/32. > > ... art connaisseur? Perhaps I should explain: When viewed in Photoshop after selecting "Auto Levels", all dust will then become readily apparent. Signaturem-m >>>I'd like to see a photo of the cloudless sky at f/32. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > When viewed in Photoshop after selecting "Auto Levels", all dust will > then become readily apparent. Perhaps I should explain: Dust is usually such a non-issue, even to those of us who change lenses often and in less than pristine conditions, that we don't worry about it until a persistant dust spot or two appears. Then about 10 minutes with a lifted mirror and blower bulb are all that are required to get it clean again. In the last 28 months I have cleaned the sensor twice. Total effort about 30 minutes. I spend more time that that scanning and editing a single film frame. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >>>> I'd like to see a photo of the cloudless sky at f/32. >>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > about 30 minutes. I spend more time that that scanning and editing a > single film frame. A blower usually does the trick. I also got a dime store makeup brush, which can be static charged with canned air (a bulb blower doesn't quite work so well) or simply used with a blower to shake off stubborn specks. If you let things go for too long, humidity &/or smoke can glue the grime on & that's where a wet cleaning with swabs & fluid is needed but DON'T use a swab before blowing &/or brushing: I wasted a bunch of expensive swabs that way just pushing dust back & forth & getting frustrated camping in death valley when a blower would have probably removed 99% of the dust. I work outdoors changing lenses in the dust all summer & it's no big deal. SignaturePaul Furman Photography http://www.edgehill.net/1 Bay Natives Nursery http://www.baynatives.com On Jun 24, 5:19 pm, Alan Browne <alan.bro...@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote: > > In article <f5jp3h$ed...@inews.gazeta.pl>, > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > a lifted mirror and blower bulb are all that are required to get it > clean again. Once Canon or Nikon produce a working anti-dust system, i wonder how many will turn it off so they can keep enjoying their 10 minute blower interludes? > I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty > conditions: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Greg > -- It realizes that your experience is not everyone's and dust as we've seen from hundreds of examples on pbase, etc, IS a problem for people. The FACT they can sell anti-dust kits for upwards of $200 should TELL even the DULLEST person this is a FACT. >> I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty >> conditions: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > people. The FACT they can sell anti-dust kits for upwards of $200 > should TELL even the DULLEST person this is a FACT. $200!?! What a bunch of idiots. Even if one does have a dust problem one doesn't need to spend $200 for an effective anti-dust kit. Greg > >> I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty > >> conditions: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Greg The full Visible Dust kits are $275.00. >> >> I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty >> >> conditions: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > The full Visible Dust kits are $275.00. All that means it that there are plenty of gullible idiots listening to people like you! Nothing more. > All that means it that there are plenty of gullible idiots listening to > people like you! Nothing more. Why feed that troll? Plonk him! >> All that means it that there are plenty of gullible idiots listening to >> people like you! Nothing more. > > Why feed that troll? Plonk him! Sure, but can you post some stuff about photography first or we will have nothing to read. >> It realizes that your experience is not everyone's and dust as we've >> seen from hundreds of examples on pbase, etc, IS a problem for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > $200!?! What a bunch of idiots. Even if one does have a dust problem > one doesn't need to spend $200 for an effective anti-dust kit. You're not kidding! For less than $200 you can buy a NASC and use it for various other household tasks like pushing beer or for refrigeration work. Buying any other kit is totally and utterly foolish! <http://www.geocities.com/ritaberk2006/sensor.htm> Rita > It realizes that your experience is not everyone's and dust as > we've seen from hundreds of examples on pbase, etc, IS a problem > for people. The FACT they can sell anti-dust kits for upwards of > $200 should TELL even the DULLEST person this is a FACT. No; I'm from the world where they successfully marketed *pet rocks*; getting people to buy something proves absolutely nothing at all, beyond that you got people to buy the thing. SignatureDavid Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/dd-b Pics: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum, http://dd- b.net/photography/gallery Dragaera: http://dragaera.info > No; I'm from the world where they successfully marketed *pet rocks*; > getting people to buy something proves absolutely nothing at all, > beyond that you got people to buy the thing. Well quite. I see someone on eBay just sold a pen1s-shaped crisp (US: potato chip). Says it all really. R. > What the hell is wrong with RichA's brain? Nothing, nothing at all. What ain't there can't be broken. -Wolfgang > I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty > conditions: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > What the hell is wrong with RichA's brain? Please don't feed the trolls. > I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty > conditions: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > noticeable spots, this time it had about 12. Both times it only took > a blower to clean it. I went for a LONG time with my 10D with no dust problems...but later I certainly ran into it. I've had only minimal dust issues on my 5D.... Some folks rarely shoot stopped down, which can make it harder to see. > What the hell is wrong with RichA's brain? That will remain a mystery, I'm afraid... SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty > conditions: > I've cleaned it twice in 2 years, the first time it had about 7 noticeable > spots, this time it had about 12. Both times it only took a blower to > clean it. So is it better to advise people (=novices) to be careful or is it better to tell them there's no way dust can get into their SLRs? And which of these are you doing? R. On Jun 24, 3:42?am, "Rudy Lacchin" <rulaREMOVET...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > > I've had my Rebel XT since it came out and I use it in very dusty > > conditions: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > R. It's better to advise them as he has done: it's no big deal, and even if you do have to clean the sensor, it takes only a few minutes of light work. I can't understand why you'd even bother to ask the second part of your question since it isn't something the OP, or anyone else, stated. >> So is it better to advise people (=novices) to be careful or is it better >> to [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I can't understand why you'd even bother to ask the second part of > your question since it isn't something the OP, or anyone else, stated. A RichA clone/puppet/alter ego would ask that. RichA is not very amusing these days and is wearing mighty thin. > >> So is it better to advise people (=novices) to be careful or is it better > >> to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > RichA is not very amusing these days and is wearing mighty thin. I guess. Meaningless or out-of-context questions can get old after a bit. And RichA has been around, here and elsewhere, quite a bit. > >> So is it better to advise people (=novices) to be careful or is it better > >> to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > RichA is not very amusing these days and is wearing mighty thin. I don't use sock puppets, unlike some of the kooks here. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.