Magnifying glass for image sensor

[tecboy]

Is there a cheap magnifying glass with led light for image sensor? Should I buy a cheap magnifying glass from any local store and use a flashlight to look through the sensor?

 

[480sparky42 42]

Here ya go.

 

[Derrel]

I have the SensorScope...it works splendidly.

 

[apaflo]

I have the SensorScope...it works splendidly.

I'm not sure how this is better than just shooting an "overexposed" shot of the sky at f/11 or f/16. That shows if something is actually affecting the image.

 

[Derrel]

I have the SensorScope...it works splendidly.

I'm not sure how this is better than just shooting an "overexposed" shot of the sky at f/11 or f/16. That shows if something is actually affecting the image.

It allows one to literally SEE the sensor surface (well, the AA filter array on most cameras), and to actually "see" where stuff happens to be on the sensor. The light it provides, and the way the light hits the sensor surface gives you a very good visual idea of what you're dealing with before swabbing the sensor. It also allows you to easily see evaporated sensor fluid, or cleaning streaks on the sensor surface. It's basically a magnified, well-lighted look at the sensor that's many times clearer than what the human eye can provide. It works better than one might imagine. But it's always nice to know that somebody who doesn't own one thinks it's useless. It's called a "tool". The SensorScope provides visual information that the unaided eye cannot yield, so you can literally "SEE" where problem areas are, and can take care of any problem issues with knowledge gained BEFORE the cleaning operation is done--whether that cleaning operation happens to be a few blasts of a blower bulb, or a wet swap, or a dry swap, or an Arctic Butterfly cleaning,etc. It's kind of like using a magnifying glass when removing a sliver, as opposed to simply sucking on the sliver with one's mouth for an day or so, until the sliver pops out.

 

[apaflo]

I have the SensorScope...it works splendidly.

I'm not sure how this is better than just shooting an "overexposed" shot of the sky at f/11 or f/16. That shows if something is actually affecting the image.

It allows one to literally SEE the sensor surface (well, the AA filter array on most cameras), and to actually "see" where stuff happens to be on the sensor. The light it provides, and the way the light hits the sensor surface gives you a very good visual idea of what you're dealing with before swabbing the sensor. It also allows you to easily see evaporated sensor fluid, or cleaning streaks on the sensor surface. It's basically a magnified, well-lighted look at the sensor that's many times clearer than what the human eye can provide. It works better than one might imagine. But it's always nice to know that somebody who doesn't own one thinks it's useless. It's called a "tool". The SensorScope provides visual information that the unaided eye cannot yield, so you can literally "SEE" where problem areas are, and can take care of any problem issues with knowledge gained BEFORE the cleaning operation is done--whether that cleaning operation happens to be a few blasts of a blower bulb, or a wet swap, or a dry swap, or an Arctic Butterfly cleaning,etc. It's kind of like using a magnifying glass when removing a sliver, as opposed to simply sucking on the sliver with one's mouth for an day or so, until the sliver pops out.

Okay, but that didn't answer my question at all.

In what way is an over exposed frame with a stopped down lens less effective than the magnifying glass? Knowing what is or is not affecting your images is the significant aspect of the tool. A zero cost over exposed shot gives better information...

Incidentally, I use two bodies specifically to avoid unnecessary lens changes, and as a result rarely need to remove dust from a sensor. i haven't had to do a wet cleaning for maybe 6 years.

 

[480sparky42 42]

Okay, but that didn't answer my question at all.

In what way is an over exposed frame with a stopped down lens less effective than the magnifying glass? Knowing what is or is not affecting your images is the significant aspect of the tool. A zero cost over exposed shot gives better information...

It's quicker.

And easier to use in the field as well. Not everyone lugs around a laptop so they can check for dust.

Incidentally, I use two bodies specifically to avoid unnecessary lens changes, and as a result rarely need to remove dust from a sensor. i haven't had to do a wet cleaning for maybe 6 years.

Good for you. But you're using a system (2 bodies) that is out of the financial reach of the vast majority of people.

I have two bodies as well, but both get lenses changed on a regular basis. I still need to swab every month or so.

 

[apaflo]

Okay, but that didn't answer my question at all.

In what way is an over exposed frame with a stopped down lens less effective than the magnifying glass? Knowing what is or is not affecting your images is the significant aspect of the tool. A zero cost over exposed shot gives better information...

It's quicker.

And easier to use in the field as well. Not everyone lugs around a laptop so they can check for dust.

Incidentally, I use two bodies specifically to avoid unnecessary lens changes, and as a result rarely need to remove dust from a sensor. i haven't had to do a wet cleaning for maybe 6 years.

Good for you. But you're using a system (2 bodies) that is out of the financial reach of the vast majority of people.

I have two bodies as well, but both get lenses changed on a regular basis. I still need to swab every month or so.

If you swab every month or so then the above comments about a magnifier being quicker in the field certainly are not valid! Packing something around every day in a field kit that is used every month or so, and should virtually never be used in the field anyway, isn't smart.

Learning how to avoid dust on the sensor in the first place is valid. Learning when and where to clean a sensor is too. The magnifying glass is a fun device, but it just won't benefit your images over using the proper techniques.

 

[tecboy]

I have one body and two lenses. I switch lenses all the times. Dust keeps creeps in the sensor no matter what. It is a hassle for me to go outside and shoot maximum f-stop and go inside my house sitting in front of my computer and upload. Detach the lens, clean the sensor, reattach the lens, go outside and repeat the process.

 

[apaflo]

I have one body and two lenses. I switch lenses all the times. Dust keeps creeps in the sensor no matter what. It is a hassle for me to go outside and shoot maximum f-stop and go inside my house sitting in front of my computer and upload. Detach the lens, clean the sensor, reattach the lens, go outside and repeat the process.

Then why are you going outside at all? Overexpose any evenly illuminated surface. A window. A wall. A large light fixture.

Don't make an effort at being difficult.

 

[Gavjenks]

Why would you need a laptop to use the minimum aperture method...???

If you can't see the dust/dirt with the worst possible intentionally set in-camera settings and a blank image in the LCD preview zoomed in, then the dust/dirt is not going to show up in your photos that are taken under less horrible circumstances, and you don't need to clean it yet.

Remember, your goal is not to remove dirt for the sake of removing dirt. Your goal is to not get dirt in your images. So unless setting your levels in photoshop to horrible posterized hell is your standard processing technique, then it makes no sense to do that diagnostically either.

There's no need to lug anything into the field other than a sealed swab or two, or to run back and forth anywhere, or even to take your card out of the camera...

 

[Derrel]

A) I always like to blindly futz around and hope-and-pray when I am doing a repair job, installing parts, or performing delicate operations. I prefer to work, test,repeat,test repeat most of the times. I figure what the hell...why not do something two, three, four times at $6 per part to hopefully get it right. Ya' know whatI'mattalkingabout?

B) I like to have great light and a magnified view when I am doing a repair job, installing parts, or performing delicate operatrions. I prefer to SEE the problem(s) and perform the needed procedures knowing EXACTLY what is required. I prefer to know EXACTLY what is needed, and to know IMMEDIATELY if my first procedure has been performed perfectly--or not. Ya' know whatI'mattalkingabout?

It's pretty simple. The SensorScope is a purpose-built, well-engineered, light, small, excellent DIAGNOSTIC and EVALUATION TOOL. Cough, cough, cough. Once again, it's a "tool". It's kind of like buying tools like timing lights and torque wrenches....oh, sure, you can futz around and estimate and futz around and do trial and error, or is it error and trial, error and trial, all you want.

The SensorScope gives its user a crystal clear,well-illuminated, magnified image and an accurate visual that shows 1) the problems that need to be addressed and 2) one's degree of success or failure in trying to eliminate the problem. it can be used both before and also after any sensor cleaning procedure.

Pretty simple. And as Gavjenks points out...this device does not need to go into the field; sensor cleanings are best performed in a controlled, dust-free, calm-air (meaning INDOOR) environment.

 

[sk66]

I would never clean a sensor in the field...blower only.
And I couldn't care about spots at f/22... I don't use apertures that small. If I start seeing spots in my images that have to be removed from areas of detail (a lot of "softer"/smaller spots won't show up in subject areas) then I'll clean the sensor... maybe a few times a year.
I change lenses outside all the time, in a variety of conditions...

FWIW, I don't use a sensor scope. I'm not that anal about getting it immaculately clean and I don't clean often enough to make it a cost effective tool *for me*. But IMO it is certainly a "good tool" if it suits you.

 

[tecboy]

I have one body and two lenses. I switch lenses all the times. Dust keeps creeps in the sensor no matter what. It is a hassle for me to go outside and shoot maximum f-stop and go inside my house sitting in front of my computer and upload. Detach the lens, clean the sensor, reattach the lens, go outside and repeat the process.

Then why are you going outside at all? Overexpose any evenly illuminated surface. A window. A wall. A large light fixture.

Don't make an effort at being difficult.

I shoot in front of my computer screen instead of going outside. When I took my T3i to the professionals for cleaning. They scratched the sensor. The little scratches can be seen in the sensor scope or other similar devices. I only see a big scratch and not little scratches on the computer screen.

 

[480sparky42 42]

If you swab every month or so then the above comments about a magnifier being quicker in the field certainly are not valid! Packing something around every day in a field kit that is used every month or so, and should virtually never be used in the field anyway, isn't smart.....

You are absolutely, grossly assuming far too much about my shooting in a feeble attempt to discredit me. Once again the TPF membership must ensure another bout of 'l"Do it apoflo's way because that's the only way things are to be done."

I don't use a magnifier while I'm shooting. Doing so would be stupid, and the only thing stupider would be thinking someone actually does that.

So let me explain this to you: I do a shoot on location. I don't have the luxury of getting to my computers to check for dust before I need to start shooting elsewhere.

So I pull out the Scope while in the truck, or in a cafe having lunch, or some other convenient location.

But the Scope gets used 99% of the time when I'm sitting at home not shooting at all. I routinely go through all my gear cleaning anything that needs it and charging all the batteries. And the quickest way I've found to check a sensor for dust in to Mirror Up For Cleaning and use the Scope.

I realize this isn't your method, but I'm not tying to discredit your method at all. It works for you and that's all that matters. More power to you for it.

But my method works for me. And that makes it just as valid as yours.










With that, I'm done here.



.