If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Dust on sensor, Sensor Brush = hogwash solution?
I see the most recommended treatment /du jour/ for the vexing "dust
specks on sensor" with digital SLRs is a brush that is charged up by spraying it with compressed air. Problem is, the company selling these brushes is extorting money from people, IMO, by charging around $100 for an item with a manufacture cost of pennies. Their website (http://www.visibledust.com) states that an ordinary nylon brush cannot be used for the following reasons: "Sensor Brush™ has been designed from the start specifically as a cleaning tool for delicate objects. There are many types of brushes in the market but they are not designed to be sensor-cleaning tools. For example, glues used in traditional brushes are quite destructive to the surface of the ND filter glass or cover glass. The polymers contained in many traditional brushes will cause a fatigued look on the glass due to the staining of the sensor. There are also many deformities in the brushes that are not visible by naked eyes. They can cause severe damage by creating microscopic scratches, which after accumulating overtime will create a fatigued look or catheter vision. We have done a lot of research in these brushes to bring the highest quality products made for the exact purpose of removing dust from delicate objects." I think this is absolute hogwash! - The glues used in synthetic brushes are in the ferrule, and will never contact the sensor surface. - Polymers (plastics) "staining" the sensor from an occasion light wipe on the surface? Balderdash! Maybe -- MAYBE -- if you let the brush rest for months against the sensor cover (also a plastic), some interaction may occur, but I doubt it. - Deformities in the brush not visible to the naked eye?! LOL! I have inspected a typical nylon artist's brush with a microscope and I see nary a "deformity" anywhere. This "Sensor Brush (TM)" product will surely go down in the history of photography as one of the worst scams of all time. How we are all going to laugh in years to come! I encourage everyone to go to an art supply store and buy a high quality nylon brush for a couple of dollars, and a can of compressed air. Voila! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:25:46 -0800, MeMe wrote:
I see the most recommended treatment /du jour/ for the vexing "dust specks on sensor" with digital SLRs is a brush that is charged up by spraying it with compressed air. Problem is, the company selling these brushes is extorting money from people, IMO, by charging around $100 for an item with a manufacture cost of pennies. The only brushes that ever worked in an anti-static capacity were for vinyl records and were treated with polonium. -Rich |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"RichA" wrote in message ... On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:25:46 -0800, MeMe wrote: I see the most recommended treatment /du jour/ for the vexing "dust specks on sensor" with digital SLRs is a brush that is charged up by spraying it with compressed air. Problem is, the company selling these brushes is extorting money from people, IMO, by charging around $100 for an item with a manufacture cost of pennies. The only brushes that ever worked in an anti-static capacity were for vinyl records and were treated with polonium. -Rich And those ionized the air around them (i.e., made the air electrically conductive). Now, since you have to have your dSLR POWERED to have the mirror up while cleaning the sensor, are you sure you want to introduce randomly conductive electrical paths? George |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:25:46 -0800, MeMe wrote:
I see the most recommended treatment /du jour/ for the vexing "dust specks on sensor" with digital SLRs is a brush that is charged up by spraying it with compressed air. Problem is, the company selling these brushes is extorting money from people, IMO, by charging around $100 for an item with a manufacture cost of pennies. The photography market has always been rife with fraud. I once saw a darkroom faucet "adapter" that cost $50 and split one faucet output into two. Turns out, it was a hardware store hose splitter worth about $6.00. -Rich |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
RichA wrote: On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:25:46 -0800, MeMe wrote: I see the most recommended treatment /du jour/ for the vexing "dust specks on sensor" with digital SLRs is a brush that is charged up by spraying it with compressed air. Problem is, the company selling these brushes is extorting money from people, IMO, by charging around $100 for an item with a manufacture cost of pennies. The photography market has always been rife with fraud. I once saw a darkroom faucet "adapter" that cost $50 and split one faucet output into two. Turns out, it was a hardware store hose splitter worth about $6.00. Even more rife with fraud is the high-end audiophile marketplace. There are companies charging several hundred US dollars *each* for wooden knobs for your preamp and amplifier, with the claim that the wood makes them *sound* better. :-) And the amazingly expensive power outlet strips, wall sockets, and plugs, which claim to affect the sound output (without bothering to replace all the wiring from the outlet back to the power transformer on the street with silver wire of heavier gauge, which might have a *tiny* effect on the sound, if only by providing more stable voltage, isolating it from the varying loads in the house (but still no protection from *external* variations. :-) And the magic crystals which simply have to be put somewhere between the amplifier and the speakers (not really *connected* to anything). When you pay enough (e.g. too much) for something, you are more willing to believe that it did something beneficial than to believe that you are a fool. :-) Enjoy, DoN. -- Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"MeMe" wrote in message news:mfCOd.57797$mt.13237@fed1read03... SNIP I think this is absolute hogwash! Nobody is forcing you to buy their brushes. They work as promised on my sensors. SNIP I encourage everyone to go to an art supply store and buy a high quality nylon brush for a couple of dollars, and a can of compressed air. Voila! Why don't you take your own advice? Bart |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Bart van der Wolf wrote:
"MeMe" wrote in message I think this is absolute hogwash! Nobody is forcing you to buy their brushes. They work as promised on my sensors. SNIP Guess which asshole spent $100 on a $2 brush? LOL! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
MeMe wrote:
Bart van der Wolf wrote: "MeMe" wrote in message I think this is absolute hogwash! Nobody is forcing you to buy their brushes. They work as promised on my sensors. SNIP Guess which asshole spent $100 on a $2 brush? LOL! And that would make someone who stuck a two dollar brush into a two thousand dollar camera a......? -- http://www.rupert.net/~solar Return address supplied by 'spammotel' http://www.spammotel.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Davey wrote:
MeMe wrote: Bart van der Wolf wrote: "MeMe" wrote in message I think this is absolute hogwash! Nobody is forcing you to buy their brushes. They work as promised on my sensors. SNIP Guess which asshole spent $100 on a $2 brush? LOL! And that would make someone who stuck a two dollar brush into a two thousand dollar camera a......? .... a smart guy, if he knows what he's doing. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"MeMe" a écrit dans le message de news:knVOd.63072$mt.54939@fed1read03... Bart van der Wolf wrote: "MeMe" wrote in message I think this is absolute hogwash! Nobody is forcing you to buy their brushes. They work as promised on my sensors. SNIP Guess which asshole spent $100 on a $2 brush? LOL! Well, count me in the asshole group, for some weird reason, I did not want to dunk a swab in liquid and streak it across MY camera's sensor nor did I want to use a $2 brush to remove the dust particles the bulb did not remove. What you do with your camera and your money is your business, what I do with mine is my business. If it didn't work, I would have felt like I was screwed, since it works, then I am happy. Jean PS Yes, I am from Canada, but my camera is from Japan, probably just like yours, does that mean only Japanese can say their cameras work? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dust on sensor, Sensor Brush = hogwash solution? | MeMe | Digital Photography | 23 | February 12th 05 05:51 PM |
20D and dust spots | Lester Wareham | Digital Photography | 0 | December 31st 04 02:25 PM |
Solution to dust causing spots in Nikon D70 ? | Dan DeConinck of PixelSmart | 35mm Photo Equipment | 8 | November 10th 04 03:29 PM |
Solution to dust causing spots in Nikon D70 ? | Dan DeConinck of PixelSmart | Digital Photography | 4 | November 9th 04 09:57 PM |
Minilabs, Dust, and Costco | Greg Lovern | Film & Labs | 1 | February 19th 04 12:25 PM |