Alan Browne wrote in
:

On 2012-05-04 17:44 , Chris Malcolm wrote:
Mike wrote:
On 03/05/2012 9:37 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2012 16:10:57 -0400, wrote:
: On 02/05/2012 3:51 PM, RichA wrote:
: I hope it's better than just electrical tape. Some of the
: cheap stuff uses crappy rubber adhesive that dries to powder
: after a while. Wouldn't that be nice inside the camera?
: Likely, they're using an acrylic adhesive tape. Maybe.
:
: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/05...5d-Mark-III-li
: ght-leak-fixed-Roger-Cicala
:
: And your point is? Film based cameras used a neoprene foam light
: trap.

Methinks his point is that neoprene foam isn't electrical tape.

Bob

Nor did Rich prove that the Canon lightseal was electrical tape, it
may well be opaque mylar tape. I doubt either Rich or the guy who
opened the camera did an analysis of the black material.

Rich looked at a photograph of the stuff. It looked like plastic.
Hey, it looked like cheap plastic electrical tape! Everyone knows
that on expensive quality cameras it's absolutely essential to use
stuff that looks expensive.

Some manufacturing tapes are extremely expensive.



The most expensive tapes are teflon re-inforced with a woven material,
like fiberglas or carbon fiber. Kapton tapes which are used in
electronics cost a lot too. You can also get pure metals with adhesive
backing for shielding. The two primary higher performance adhesives are
acrylic and silicone-based along with some very strong partially-curing
epoxies. Nikon has used kaptons to hold things like ferrite noise -
supressing rings in-place in cameras.