Two MORE problems with plastic-bodied cameras

They attract dust FAR more readily (owing no doubt to static build-up)
than metal bodied cameras and in the sun, black plastic bodies heat up
hotter and faster than metal bodies, even those painted black. The IR
signature of a black painted magnesium camera is far brighter than
black plastic cameras. Use an IR camera with a strong IR source (the
sun) on a metal camera (black) and it can look purple owing to IR
reflectivity. The plastic affinity for dust was confirmed by a friend
with a D80 and D200. He reports that the D80 attracts more dust and
although he's had both and used the D200 more, it has not needed
sensor cleaning at all in six months, whereas the D80 has on a few
occassions.

In article . com,
RichA wrote:

They attract dust FAR more readily (owing no doubt to static build-up)
than metal bodied cameras and in the sun, black plastic bodies heat up
hotter and faster than metal bodies, even those painted black. The IR
signature of a black painted magnesium camera is far brighter than
black plastic cameras. Use an IR camera with a strong IR source (the
sun) on a metal camera (black) and it can look purple owing to IR
reflectivity. The plastic affinity for dust was confirmed by a friend
with a D80 and D200. He reports that the D80 attracts more dust and
although he's had both and used the D200 more, it has not needed
sensor cleaning at all in six months, whereas the D80 has on a few
occassions.

Do us all a favor and *STFU*.

On Oct 10, 1:14 pm, Randall Ainsworth
wrote:
In article . com,

RichA wrote:
They attract dust FAR more readily (owing no doubt to static build-up)
than metal bodied cameras and in the sun, black plastic bodies heat up
hotter and faster than metal bodies, even those painted black. The IR
signature of a black painted magnesium camera is far brighter than
black plastic cameras. Use an IR camera with a strong IR source (the
sun) on a metal camera (black) and it can look purple owing to IR
reflectivity. The plastic affinity for dust was confirmed by a friend
with a D80 and D200. He reports that the D80 attracts more dust and
although he's had both and used the D200 more, it has not needed
sensor cleaning at all in six months, whereas the D80 has on a few
occassions.

Do us all a favor and *STFU*.

Haven't you got a gay wedding to photography somewhere?

On Oct 10, 2:40 pm, TRoss wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:26:58 -0700, RichA
wrote:

They attract dust FAR more readily (owing no doubt to static build-up)

Oh, yeah, no doubt. As long as you're going to make it up as you go,
please continue....

than metal bodied cameras and in the sun, black plastic bodies heat up
hotter and faster than metal bodies, even those painted black.

I think if you'd test that claim before you shared it you would find
the conductive properties of most metals is much higher than that of
most plastics, which causes most metals to heat up more quickly and
more thoroughly than most plastics.

Have done it, using a Ratheon IR sensitive thermometer. However, I
realized this when I was using an E-1 (metal) and an E-330 (plastic).
The plastic got noticeably hotting in a shorter timeframe.

The IR
signature of a black painted magnesium camera is far brighter than
black plastic cameras.

Which would mean the magnesium camera is hotter than the plastic
camera. The signature for the plastic signature could be misleading
because plastic is a good insulator ... so the "heat" may only be
external.

Use an IR camera with a strong IR source (the
sun) on a metal camera (black) and it can look purple owing to IR
reflectivity.

The amount of *reflected* IR is due to the IR absorption properties of
the material. The radiated IR, OTOH, is heat.

Radiate =/ Reflected

The plastic affinity for dust was confirmed by a friend
with a D80 and D200. He reports that the D80 attracts more dust and
although he's had both and used the D200 more, it has not needed
sensor cleaning at all in six months, whereas the D80 has on a few
occassions.

Would this be the same "friend" who took this gawd-awful photo? If so,
dust is the least of his worries.

www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/85161318

TR

Only a piece of the original file, which I stated before.

In article .com,
RichA wrote:

Do us all a favor and *STFU*.

Haven't you got a gay wedding to photography somewhere?

And get a dictionary while you're at it...

RichA wrote:

BS SNIPPED ...

The plastic affinity for dust was confirmed by a friend.
^^^^^^^^^

You want us to believe that statement?

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:06:22 -0400, Not Disclosed
wrote:

RichA wrote:

BS SNIPPED ...

The plastic affinity for dust was confirmed by a friend.
^^^^^^^^^

You want us to believe that statement?

Sure. It's his only friend, his right-hand man.

--
John Bean

On 11 Oct, 02:06, Not Disclosed wrote:
RichA wrote:

BS SNIPPED ...

The plastic affinity for dust was confirmed by a friend.

^^^^^^^^^

You want us to believe that statement?

The big problem with plastic bodied cameras is that they don't leave
as much of a dent in Richies head as the metal ones.

Doc

You don't think anyone takes you seriously, do you?

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:52:13 -0000, Dr Hfuhruhurr
wrote:

On 11 Oct, 02:06, Not Disclosed wrote:
RichA wrote:

BS SNIPPED ...

The plastic affinity for dust was confirmed by a friend.

^^^^^^^^^

You want us to believe that statement?

The big problem with plastic bodied cameras is that they don't leave
as much of a dent in Richies head as the metal ones.

Doc

Perhaps the best argument for metal bodied cameras ever presented
here.