smudge on mirror

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Stimp, Aug 20, 2007.

  1. Stimp

    Stimp Guest

    Hi all, accidentally smudged the mirror on my Canon 400D while changing
    the lens.

    I assume a microfiber cloth is fine to clean it off?
    --

    fiddlewidawiddum
     
    Stimp, Aug 20, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Stimp

    Stimp Guest

    On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 Stimp <> wrote:
    > Hi all, accidentally smudged the mirror on my Canon 400D while changing
    > the lens.
    >
    > I assume a microfiber cloth is fine to clean it off?


    anyone?

    To answer my own question, I applied the cloth and pictures seem fine
    since, but not sure if it's common-place to wipe the mirror with a
    microfiber cloth?

    --

    fiddlewidawiddum
     
    Stimp, Aug 21, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Stimp

    Astroguy Guest

    On 21 Aug 2007 01:46:35 GMT, Stimp <> wrote:

    >On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 Stimp <> wrote:
    >> Hi all, accidentally smudged the mirror on my Canon 400D while changing
    >> the lens.
    >>
    >> I assume a microfiber cloth is fine to clean it off?

    >
    >anyone?
    >
    >To answer my own question, I applied the cloth and pictures seem fine
    >since, but not sure if it's common-place to wipe the mirror with a
    >microfiber cloth?
    >


    This is bad bad bad ... under no circumstances should you ever "wipe" a
    1st-surface mirror. And especially not with a dry tissue of any kind. Even
    though microfiber cloth would be the least of available evils.You can get away
    with it but if you now look at your mirror in bright sunlight you will see a
    smear of microscopic gouges where you wiped it. Any light hitting it
    perpendicular to those streaks will lose their contrast and cause slight flares
    in the image. 1st-surface mirrors are inherently very soft, even when they are
    coated with the usual silicon-oxide coating to HELP to try to protect them. But
    the very soft reflective aluminum underneath allows you to dent it
    microscopically with the slightest of touches. They need to be cleaned very
    carefully. When cleaning a telescope's 1st-surface mirror I don't even allow any
    pressure other than water spraying on it to touch it. In worst-case scenarios I
    will use a soft camel-hair brush to try to very gently dislodge something that
    is adhering but only with a sideways pressure to nudge it off the surface while
    water is being played on the surface, never with any kind of pressure or
    scrubbing motion.

    You probably didn't do any damage that will impair the use of your camera this
    time. It would take quite a few wipes before you started to see highly obvious
    image degradation, just don't do it again .... unless it's an emergency where
    you have to get some salt-water off of it or something. And even then only
    lightly daub the water off of the surface, repeating with cotton wetted with
    100% pure distilled water.

    If you absolutely must clean a 1st-surface mirror do so with soft cotton batting
    that is lightly wetted with some 90% isopropyl alcohol. Make sure it is pure.
    Many rubbing alcohols contain scents in the form of oils that will remain behind
    making things much worse. Then pull the wetted cotton across the mirror so
    lightly that you don't put any pressure on it. Just the weight of the cotton
    alone. After it is clean, then repeat with 100% pure distilled water. Allow any
    residual moisture to evaporate naturally. If it is 100% distilled water it will
    completely evaporate and leave nothing behind. Under no circumstances should you
    wipe the water away. You can lightly daub some of it off with pure clean cotton
    but don't touch the mirror more than you have to.

    Do a search on the net for further advice about cleaning 1st-surface mirrors.
    The most common tutorials online for 1st-surface mirrors will be for cleaning
    telescope optics of reflector (Newtonian) telescopes. You'll see how carefully
    they have to be cleaned.
     
    Astroguy, Aug 21, 2007
    #3
  4. Stimp

    dj_nme Guest

    Stimp wrote:
    > On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 Stimp <> wrote:
    >
    >>Hi all, accidentally smudged the mirror on my Canon 400D while changing
    >>the lens.
    >>
    >>I assume a microfiber cloth is fine to clean it off?

    >
    >
    > anyone?
    >
    > To answer my own question, I applied the cloth and pictures seem fine
    > since, but not sure if it's common-place to wipe the mirror with a
    > microfiber cloth?


    I don't see any reason why not, a microfiber cloth is soft and lint-free.
    The reflex mirror isn't part of the optical path to the sensor, it flips
    up and out of the way when the shutter is tripped.
    It's really part of the viewfinder and reflects the image up onto the
    focus screen, which is what you see when you look into the viewfinder.
    Scratches on the mirror can be pretty bad before they effect the image
    you see through the viewfinder, it mainly just makes it a little bit
    dimmer than when it's pristine.
     
    dj_nme, Aug 21, 2007
    #4
  5. Stimp

    Stimp Guest

    On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 dj_nme <> wrote:
    > Stimp wrote:
    >> On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 Stimp <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Hi all, accidentally smudged the mirror on my Canon 400D while changing
    >>>the lens.
    >>>
    >>>I assume a microfiber cloth is fine to clean it off?

    >>
    >>
    >> anyone?
    >>
    >> To answer my own question, I applied the cloth and pictures seem fine
    >> since, but not sure if it's common-place to wipe the mirror with a
    >> microfiber cloth?

    >
    > I don't see any reason why not, a microfiber cloth is soft and lint-free.
    > The reflex mirror isn't part of the optical path to the sensor, it flips
    > up and out of the way when the shutter is tripped.
    > It's really part of the viewfinder and reflects the image up onto the
    > focus screen, which is what you see when you look into the viewfinder.
    > Scratches on the mirror can be pretty bad before they effect the image
    > you see through the viewfinder, it mainly just makes it a little bit
    > dimmer than when it's pristine.


    Ah fantastic .. so the state of the mirror doesn't affect the resulting
    image on the sensor?

    Good good news :)
    --

    fiddlewidawiddum
     
    Stimp, Aug 21, 2007
    #5
  6. Stimp

    Stimp Guest

    On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 Astroguy <> wrote:
    > On 21 Aug 2007 01:46:35 GMT, Stimp <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 Stimp <> wrote:
    >>> Hi all, accidentally smudged the mirror on my Canon 400D while changing
    >>> the lens.
    >>>
    >>> I assume a microfiber cloth is fine to clean it off?

    >>
    >>anyone?
    >>
    >>To answer my own question, I applied the cloth and pictures seem fine
    >>since, but not sure if it's common-place to wipe the mirror with a
    >>microfiber cloth?
    >>

    >
    > This is bad bad bad ... under no circumstances should you ever "wipe" a
    > 1st-surface mirror. And especially not with a dry tissue of any kind. Even
    > though microfiber cloth would be the least of available evils.You can get away
    > with it but if you now look at your mirror in bright sunlight you will see a
    > smear of microscopic gouges where you wiped it. Any light hitting it
    > perpendicular to those streaks will lose their contrast and cause slight flares
    > in the image. 1st-surface mirrors are inherently very soft, even when they are
    > coated with the usual silicon-oxide coating to HELP to try to protect them. But
    > the very soft reflective aluminum underneath allows you to dent it
    > microscopically with the slightest of touches. They need to be cleaned very
    > carefully. When cleaning a telescope's 1st-surface mirror I don't even allow any
    > pressure other than water spraying on it to touch it. In worst-case scenarios I
    > will use a soft camel-hair brush to try to very gently dislodge something that
    > is adhering but only with a sideways pressure to nudge it off the surface while
    > water is being played on the surface, never with any kind of pressure or
    > scrubbing motion.
    >
    > You probably didn't do any damage that will impair the use of your camera this
    > time. It would take quite a few wipes before you started to see highly obvious
    > image degradation, just don't do it again .... unless it's an emergency where
    > you have to get some salt-water off of it or something. And even then only
    > lightly daub the water off of the surface, repeating with cotton wetted with
    > 100% pure distilled water.
    >
    > If you absolutely must clean a 1st-surface mirror do so with soft cotton batting
    > that is lightly wetted with some 90% isopropyl alcohol. Make sure it is pure.
    > Many rubbing alcohols contain scents in the form of oils that will remain behind
    > making things much worse. Then pull the wetted cotton across the mirror so
    > lightly that you don't put any pressure on it. Just the weight of the cotton
    > alone. After it is clean, then repeat with 100% pure distilled water. Allow any
    > residual moisture to evaporate naturally. If it is 100% distilled water it will
    > completely evaporate and leave nothing behind. Under no circumstances should you
    > wipe the water away. You can lightly daub some of it off with pure clean cotton
    > but don't touch the mirror more than you have to.
    >
    > Do a search on the net for further advice about cleaning 1st-surface mirrors.
    > The most common tutorials online for 1st-surface mirrors will be for cleaning
    > telescope optics of reflector (Newtonian) telescopes. You'll see how carefully
    > they have to be cleaned.


    ok interesting advice there, thanks.

    Yeah I looked at the mirror extensively in a very well lit area and
    can't see any smears on it.

    As the other guys mentions though, the mirror moves out of the way when
    the shutter is opened so shouldn't affect the underlying sensor images?
    --

    fiddlewidawiddum
     
    Stimp, Aug 21, 2007
    #6
  7. In article <>, Stimp
    <> wrote:

    > ok interesting advice there, thanks.
    >
    > Yeah I looked at the mirror extensively in a very well lit area and
    > can't see any smears on it.


    The classic way to clean first surface mirrors was to paint them with
    collodion, allow it to dry, and peel off the resulting film. I've done
    it that way with perfect results.

    However, collodion solution is both flammable and toxic; there are
    polymer based substitutes available if you have to clean a lot of
    mirrors.

    That said, I've had good results with 90-100% Isopropyl alcohol and a
    microfiber cloth. These cloths vary a lot in quality; the ones you
    want will be very soft and dense, looking like suede. With this
    technique, the most critical thing is making absolutely sure you remove
    ALL loose dust before wiping. Each particle left there will act like a
    gouge on the mirror surface.
     
    Scott Schuckert, Aug 21, 2007
    #7
  8. Stimp

    Stimp Guest

    On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 Scott Schuckert <> wrote:
    > In article <>, Stimp
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> ok interesting advice there, thanks.
    >>
    >> Yeah I looked at the mirror extensively in a very well lit area and
    >> can't see any smears on it.

    >
    > The classic way to clean first surface mirrors was to paint them with
    > collodion, allow it to dry, and peel off the resulting film. I've done
    > it that way with perfect results.
    >
    > However, collodion solution is both flammable and toxic; there are
    > polymer based substitutes available if you have to clean a lot of
    > mirrors.
    >
    > That said, I've had good results with 90-100% Isopropyl alcohol and a
    > microfiber cloth. These cloths vary a lot in quality; the ones you
    > want will be very soft and dense, looking like suede. With this
    > technique, the most critical thing is making absolutely sure you remove
    > ALL loose dust before wiping. Each particle left there will act like a
    > gouge on the mirror surface.


    whether or not the mirror is scratched doesn't affect the resulting
    image taken though does it??

    (assuming what dj_nme said is right)
    --

    fiddlewidawiddum
     
    Stimp, Aug 22, 2007
    #8
  9. Stimp

    dj_nme Guest

    Stimp wrote:
    > On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 dj_nme <> wrote:
    >
    >>Stimp wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 Stimp <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Hi all, accidentally smudged the mirror on my Canon 400D while changing
    >>>>the lens.
    >>>>
    >>>>I assume a microfiber cloth is fine to clean it off?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>anyone?
    >>>
    >>>To answer my own question, I applied the cloth and pictures seem fine
    >>>since, but not sure if it's common-place to wipe the mirror with a
    >>>microfiber cloth?

    >>
    >>I don't see any reason why not, a microfiber cloth is soft and lint-free.
    >>The reflex mirror isn't part of the optical path to the sensor, it flips
    >>up and out of the way when the shutter is tripped.
    >>It's really part of the viewfinder and reflects the image up onto the
    >>focus screen, which is what you see when you look into the viewfinder.
    >>Scratches on the mirror can be pretty bad before they effect the image
    >>you see through the viewfinder, it mainly just makes it a little bit
    >>dimmer than when it's pristine.

    >
    >
    > Ah fantastic .. so the state of the mirror doesn't affect the resulting
    > image on the sensor?
    >
    > Good good news :)


    No, it doesn't.
    The mirror is part of the viewfinder, not in the imaging path to the sensor.
    Unless you've got one of the film SLR cameras with a fixed pellicle
    mirror (like the Canon EOS RT
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_RT>), the mirror flips up and
    out of the way when a picture is taken.
    For a general description of how a SLR camera works, look here:
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-lens_reflex_camera>
     
    dj_nme, Aug 22, 2007
    #9
  10. Stimp

    Stimp Guest

    On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 dj_nme <> wrote:
    >>
    >> Ah fantastic .. so the state of the mirror doesn't affect the resulting
    >> image on the sensor?

    >
    > No, it doesn't.
    > The mirror is part of the viewfinder, not in the imaging path to the sensor.
    ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_RT>), the mirror flips up and
    > out of the way when a picture is taken.


    cheers, I was wondering why such a core piece of the technology would be
    exposed so vulnerably-like that (I mean changing the lens without
    getting some dust in there is nigh-on impossible sometimes unless you're
    extremely fast)

    Obviously applying 'too much' pressure to the mirror would be a bad
    thing though, since the sensor underneath would probably get damaged.
    --

    fiddlewidawiddum
     
    Stimp, Aug 22, 2007
    #10
  11. Stimp

    Charlie Self Guest

    On Aug 21, 9:24 pm, Stimp <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 dj_nme <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >> Ah fantastic .. so the state of the mirror doesn't affect the resulting
    > >> image on the sensor?

    >
    > > No, it doesn't.
    > > The mirror is part of the viewfinder, not in the imaging path to the sensor.
    > ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_RT>), the mirror flips up and
    > > out of the way when a picture is taken.

    >
    > cheers, I was wondering why such a core piece of the technology would be
    > exposed so vulnerably-like that (I mean changing the lens without
    > getting some dust in there is nigh-on impossible sometimes unless you're
    > extremely fast)
    >
    > Obviously applying 'too much' pressure to the mirror would be a bad
    > thing though, since the sensor underneath would probably get damaged.
    > --
    >
    > fiddlewidawiddum


    The pressure wouldn't damage the sensor, but it would damage the
    mirror mechanism, which then means the mirror will raise, or lower, or
    both, erratically or not at all.

    I clean my sensor whenever needed. I would NOT touch the mirror.
     
    Charlie Self, Aug 22, 2007
    #11
  12. Stimp

    Stimp Guest

    On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 Charlie Self <> wrote:
    > On Aug 21, 9:24 pm, Stimp <> wrote:
    >> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 dj_nme <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> >> Ah fantastic .. so the state of the mirror doesn't affect the resulting
    >> >> image on the sensor?

    >>
    >> > No, it doesn't.
    >> > The mirror is part of the viewfinder, not in the imaging path to the sensor.
    >> ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_RT>), the mirror flips up and
    >> > out of the way when a picture is taken.

    >>
    >> cheers, I was wondering why such a core piece of the technology would be
    >> exposed so vulnerably-like that (I mean changing the lens without
    >> getting some dust in there is nigh-on impossible sometimes unless you're
    >> extremely fast)
    >>
    >> Obviously applying 'too much' pressure to the mirror would be a bad
    >> thing though, since the sensor underneath would probably get damaged.
    >> --
    >>
    >> fiddlewidawiddum

    >
    > The pressure wouldn't damage the sensor, but it would damage the
    > mirror mechanism, which then means the mirror will raise, or lower, or
    > both, erratically or not at all.
    >
    > I clean my sensor whenever needed. I would NOT touch the mirror.


    strange, I thought the sensor was the part you must never touch yourself.

    the pressure I applied to the mirror was only equivalent to that you
    would apply if touching your eyeball with your finger, plus I used a
    cotton bud behind the cloth to apply the pressure, rather than my
    finger.

    Pictures seem fine though so evidently no damage done. Phew :)
    --

    fiddlewidawiddum
     
    Stimp, Aug 22, 2007
    #12
  13. writes:

    >whether or not the mirror is scratched doesn't affect the resulting
    >image taken though does it??


    No. The reflex mirror of a SLR is not in the image light path; it's
    used for viewing and sometimes metering and autofocus only.

    In this respect, it's less critical than a telescope mirror, which is
    part of the image light path.

    Dave
     
    Dave Martindale, Aug 24, 2007
    #13
  14. Stimp

    Bobbert Guest

    On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 04:58:11 +0000 (UTC), (Dave Martindale)
    wrote:

    > writes:
    >
    >>whether or not the mirror is scratched doesn't affect the resulting
    >>image taken though does it??

    >
    >No. The reflex mirror of a SLR is not in the image light path; it's
    >used for viewing and sometimes metering and autofocus only.
    >
    >In this respect, it's less critical than a telescope mirror, which is
    >part of the image light path.
    >
    > Dave


    As long as you don't mind having your image's contrast and light levels being
    different from your factory calibrated exposure settings, as well as degrading
    auto-focus speeds, go ahead scratch the hell out of it. Wipe it clean every time
    you see a smudge or dust on it. Because if you don't clean it then it's
    degrading those same functions in your camera anyway. If the direction of
    scratches caused from wiping the mirror tend to all go in the same direction
    then even the orientation of light in your scene will change your exposure
    readings depending on the camera being in landscape or portrait mode because
    contrast loss and light scattering will be more strongly perpendicular to the
    direction of those scratches.

    No matter. Once they've destroyed that camera's functions they'll just be buying
    a new one because only the latest and best camera will get them closer to being
    a real photographer one day. I read their "I wish I was a photographer"
    desperation in this group every day when they argue and drool over which new
    camera or lens will magically bestow them with talent, creativity, and
    intelligence.

    The "less/non-critical mirror" comments in this thread only reinforces what I've
    already come to believe -- that people who buy and use dslrs are totally
    clueless about anything and everything. I also now believe that the vast
    majority of dslr sales are totally dependent on the "monkey-see, monkey-do"
    principle. A base neural activity that should fall well within the reptilian
    brain-stem functions.
     
    Bobbert, Aug 24, 2007
    #14
  15. Stimp

    Stimp Guest

    On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 Bobbert <> wrote:
    > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 04:58:11 +0000 (UTC), (Dave Martindale)
    > wrote:
    >
    >> writes:
    >>
    >>>whether or not the mirror is scratched doesn't affect the resulting
    >>>image taken though does it??

    >>
    >>No. The reflex mirror of a SLR is not in the image light path; it's
    >>used for viewing and sometimes metering and autofocus only.
    >>
    >>In this respect, it's less critical than a telescope mirror, which is
    >>part of the image light path.
    >>
    >> Dave

    >
    > As long as you don't mind having your image's contrast and light levels being
    > different from your factory calibrated exposure settings, as well as degrading
    > auto-focus speeds, go ahead scratch the hell out of it. Wipe it clean every time
    > you see a smudge or dust on it. Because if you don't clean it then it's
    > degrading those same functions in your camera anyway. If the direction of
    > scratches caused from wiping the mirror tend to all go in the same direction
    > then even the orientation of light in your scene will change your exposure
    > readings depending on the camera being in landscape or portrait mode because
    > contrast loss and light scattering will be more strongly perpendicular to the
    > direction of those scratches.
    >
    > No matter. Once they've destroyed that camera's functions they'll just be buying
    > a new one because only the latest and best camera will get them closer to being
    > a real photographer one day. I read their "I wish I was a photographer"
    > desperation in this group every day when they argue and drool over which new
    > camera or lens will magically bestow them with talent, creativity, and
    > intelligence.
    >
    > The "less/non-critical mirror" comments in this thread only reinforces what I've
    > already come to believe -- that people who buy and use dslrs are totally
    > clueless about anything and everything. I also now believe that the vast
    > majority of dslr sales are totally dependent on the "monkey-see, monkey-do"
    > principle. A base neural activity that should fall well within the reptilian
    > brain-stem functions.



    oooh can I be your friend ?

    --

    fiddlewidawiddum
     
    Stimp, Aug 24, 2007
    #15
  16. Stimp

    Alan Browne Guest

    Astroguy wrote:
    > On 21 Aug 2007 01:46:35 GMT, Stimp <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 Stimp <> wrote:
    >>> Hi all, accidentally smudged the mirror on my Canon 400D while changing
    >>> the lens.
    >>>
    >>> I assume a microfiber cloth is fine to clean it off?

    >> anyone?
    >>
    >> To answer my own question, I applied the cloth and pictures seem fine
    >> since, but not sure if it's common-place to wipe the mirror with a
    >> microfiber cloth?
    >>

    >
    > This is bad bad bad ... under no circumstances should you ever "wipe" a
    > 1st-surface mirror. And especially not with a dry tissue of any kind. Even
    > though microfiber cloth would be the least of available evils.You can get away
    > with it but if you now look at your mirror in bright sunlight you will see a
    > smear of microscopic gouges where you wiped it. Any light hitting it
    > perpendicular to those streaks will lose their contrast and cause slight flares
    > in the image.


    Ahem. The mirror in a camera is up when the photo is taken* and has NO
    effect on the image at all for minor smudged, scratches etc. It _might_
    affect exposure reading _if_ seriously damaged.

    *Pelicule cameras like variants of the EOS-1n image through the mirror,
    but scratches here would be so OOF as to not register but they migh
    cause some contrast loss. AFAIK no digital SLR to date has a pelicule
    mirror (aka 50% silvered mirror).

    --
    -- 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.
     
    Alan Browne, Aug 25, 2007
    #16
  17. Stimp

    Bobbert Guest

    On 24 Aug 2007 16:21:34 GMT, Stimp <> wrote:

    >
    >oooh can I be your friend ?


    You might have some psychotic need for imaginary disembodied e-friends from
    online forums, news-groups, and chat rooms, but I am not thus handicapped.
     
    Bobbert, Aug 26, 2007
    #17
  18. Stimp

    Stimp Guest

    On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 Bobbert <> wrote:
    > On 24 Aug 2007 16:21:34 GMT, Stimp <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>oooh can I be your friend ?

    >
    > You might have some psychotic need for imaginary disembodied e-friends from
    > online forums, news-groups, and chat rooms, but I am not thus handicapped.


    awww.. and you sound like such a fun guy too

    --

    fiddlewidawiddum
     
    Stimp, Aug 26, 2007
    #18
  19. Stimp

    ASAAR Guest

    On 25 Aug 2007 23:29:53 GMT, Stimp wrote:

    >> You might have some psychotic need for imaginary disembodied e-friends from
    >> online forums, news-groups, and chat rooms, but I am not thus handicapped.

    >
    > awww.. and you sound like such a fun guy too


    It's just another of the numerous anti-DSLR sock puppets that have
    been infesting the newsgroup for a couple of months. For it,
    therapy would be less useful than a meal of anti-vermin bait. :)
     
    ASAAR, Aug 26, 2007
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. news3.california.com
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    392
    news3.california.com
    Jan 8, 2004
  2. Anthony

    HELP big smudge on monitor

    Anthony, Nov 19, 2003, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    6,544
  3. John Jones

    Smudge tool in PS Elements?

    John Jones, Jul 27, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    389
    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
    Jul 28, 2006
  4. Steve Kraus

    smudge in my Oly C2020Z pictures

    Steve Kraus, Sep 19, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    359
    Fred McKenzie
    Sep 20, 2006
  5. brett

    Where is this smudge coming from?

    brett, Jul 19, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    412
    Scott W
    Jul 20, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page