Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Dust on sensor, Sensor Brush = hogwash solution?

Reply
Thread Tools

Dust on sensor, Sensor Brush = hogwash solution?

 
 
MeMe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005
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!
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:25:46 -0800, MeMe <(E-Mail Removed)> 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
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:25:46 -0800, MeMe <(E-Mail Removed)> 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
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jason P.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005
Although you make good points about this product... I would never recommend
using compressed air in the chamber of a digital camera. If you use an
aerosol/compressed air it becomes very easy get liquid proplent on the CCD.
I also usually recommend against using a brush of any kind... as the
bristles can damage the extremely delicate filters that sit overtop of the
sensor. Best idea - a blower... which you can get for a few bucks from any
camera store.

> 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!



 
Reply With Quote
 
George
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005

"RichA" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:25:46 -0800, MeMe <(E-Mail Removed)> 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


 
Reply With Quote
 
Alan Adrian
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005
In the case of a Sensor Brush, the air is to charge and clean the brush ...
it's used away from the camera.

I myself view the Sensor Brush as a case of someone trying to capitilize on
a bit of research into what works best, and some added value of clean room
(I hope) techniques in packaging... But If I am looking forward to the day
that the research gets into the public domain (someone else does some
looking and reports it to the Internet),and a known source for the
appropriate (clean) brush...

So that we can pay the $3 worth of materials and shipping, instead of the
gross amount currently charged.

Al..

"Jason P." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:LVGOd.6295$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I would never recommend using compressed air in the chamber of a digital
>camera. If you use an aerosol/compressed air it becomes very easy get
>liquid proplent on the CCD.



 
Reply With Quote
 
MeMe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005
Alan Adrian wrote:

> I am looking forward to the day that the research gets into the
> public domain (someone else does some looking and reports it to the
> Internet),and a known source for the appropriate (clean) brush...


A simple experiment you could do at home is take a dusty surface and
lightly brush it once with a grounded nylon brush (ground it by touching
it to a bare metal source) from an art store, then visually ascertain
the amount of dust remaining after the stroke.

Then repeat the experiment with the same brush in another area, but this
time "charge" the brush electrostatically with a long blast of air from
a can of compressed air.

Theoretically, the "charged" brush should do a better job of lifting
dust by attracting dust particles.

Let us know the outcome ...
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bart van der Wolf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005

"MeMe" <(E-Mail Removed)> 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

 
Reply With Quote
 
Jason P.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005
What I was referring to was not the Sensor Brush, but the alternative he
posted. Low pass filters are extremely fragile brush bristles of any kind
can damage the surface.

"Alan Adrian" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:420b5fb0$0$57523$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In the case of a Sensor Brush, the air is to charge and clean the brush
> ... it's used away from the camera.
>
> I myself view the Sensor Brush as a case of someone trying to capitilize
> on a bit of research into what works best, and some added value of clean
> room (I hope) techniques in packaging... But If I am looking forward to
> the day that the research gets into the public domain (someone else does
> some looking and reports it to the Internet),and a known source for the
> appropriate (clean) brush...
>
> So that we can pay the $3 worth of materials and shipping, instead of the
> gross amount currently charged.
>
> Al..
>
> "Jason P." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:LVGOd.6295$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>I would never recommend using compressed air in the chamber of a digital
>>camera. If you use an aerosol/compressed air it becomes very easy get
>>liquid proplent on the CCD.

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
MeMe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2005
Jason P. wrote:
> What I was referring to was not the Sensor Brush, but the alternative
> he posted. Low pass filters are extremely fragile brush bristles of
> any kind can damage the surface.


I see you are posting from Canada, which just coincidentally is the home
of visibledust.com. I'm not implying that you are a sock puppet for that
company, but it /is/ an interesting coincidence.

You say that "bristle brushes" can damage low pass sensors. You are
spreading FUD, aren't you? A hog's hair bristle brush used for oil
painting is indeed a harsh item, but we are not discussing that sort of
"bristle" brush here. We are taking about soft nylon hairs, such as may
be found in synthetic brushes.

So, now, on what basis do you state that soft nylon hairs can "damage" a
plastic filter? I'm just tickled pink that you are here, saying these
things. Please continue ...
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sensor Klear Brush - Comments ? Bernard Rother Digital Photography 5 11-30-2007 08:24 PM
DVD Verdict reviews: DUST TO DUST (POR LA LIBRE), HANGIN' WITH THE HOMEBOYS, and more! DVD Verdict DVD Video 0 02-26-2004 10:04 AM
Superbit DVD's worth it? Or a bunch of hogwash? Sam DVD Video 7 11-20-2003 02:49 PM
sensor dust Andrew Digital Photography 3 09-30-2003 02:18 AM
Maybe I'm all wet, but I thought there was a new sensor that hasa piezo thingamagig to prevent dust Bay Area Dave Digital Photography 7 09-21-2003 12:16 AM



Advertisments