How strong is the tripod mount on the bottom of a DSLR?

Question

I'm looking at getting a sling-style strap for my camera (Canon 60D) but the one thing I keep wondering is if the tripod mount is strong enough to "hang" the camera from. I've seen some discussions of this, but no clear answer.

Are the any known issues with hanging a camera from the tripod mount? Would hanging it from one of the side lugs be stronger/safer?

Asked by Ward

Answer

The mount on the bottom of the camera is plenty strong. I carry a 5D and 1Ds Mk III around with my Black Rapid all the time and have had no problem. Just make sure you have the screw snugged down and check it periodically.

I really can't recommend these sling straps enough. I have a Black Rapid, so I haven't tried any others, but it's really made it a lot easier on my neck and back to carry heavy cameras and long lenses around.

Answered by Steve Ross

Check more discussion of this question.

Why do I sometimes get a shaking viewfinder image in my Canon 550D?

Question

Sometimes I put my viewfinder to my eye before I turn on my camera. When I turn it on, the viewfinder image slightly shakes and moves a bit vertically. This also happens when I look through my viewfinder and press the shutter when the camera has been on, but not used for several minutes.

My camera is a 8 month old Canon 550D and I use it with a Sigma 18-50 mm f/2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM lens.

As it happens sometimes, the behaviour is hard to reproduce and hence I can not give you more information about the problem.

Does anybody know why this is happening?

Asked by Bart Arondson

Answer

As forsvarir says, it's most likely the optical stabilisation initialising.

And to clear up one of you comments; In a DSLR you will only see a stabilised image in the view finder with a stabilised lens. When you look through the view finder you're not seeing a picture that have been captured by the sensor first. So any stabilising happening on the sensor is not visible through the view finder.

With a mirror-less camera where you use the screen instead of a view finder, sensor stabilisation will be visible.

Answered by Håkon K. Olafsen

Check more discussion of this question.

Shaking viewfinder image in Canon 550D

Question

Sometimes I put my viewfinder to my eye before I turn on my camera. When I turn it on, the viewfinder image slightly shakes and moves a bit vertically. This also happens when I look through my viewfinder and press the shutter when the camera has been on, but not used for several minutes.

My camera is a 8 month old Canon 550D and I use it with a Sigma 18-50 mm f/2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM lens.

As it happens sometimes, the behaviour is hard to reproduce and hence I can not give you more information about the problem.

Does anybody know why this is happening?

Asked by Bart Arondson

Answer

As forsvarir says, it's most likely the optical stabilisation initialising.

And to clear up one of you comments; In a DSLR you will only see a stabilised image in the view finder with a stabilised lens. When you look through the view finder you're not seeing a picture that have been captured by the sensor first. So any stabilising happening on the sensor is not visible through the view finder.

With a mirror-less camera where you use the screen instead of a view finder sensor stabilisation will be visible.

Answered by Håkon K. Olafsen

Check more discussion of this question.

Are these images symptomatic of shutter failure?

Question

This is a burst sequence taken with a Canon 1D Mark II N in high-speed mode (8fps). You can see the bright line down the center and the dark area in the upper-right. I have several other sequences with similar artifacts.

Is my shutter failing, or is there something else going on?

Shutter count utilities at http://www.foxbat.me.uk/2.0/index.php#/1dcount and http://www.camerashuttercount.com/ both indicate a shutter count of ~79,000, though I do not know the accuracy of these sites, nor do I have an estimate of the camera's shutter count as I got the camera used with no pedigree. My understanding is that this particular model's shutter life expectancy is around 200,000 actuations and I've heard of people getting over 400,000.

---

UPDATE: I decided to crack it open and inspect the darn thing:

Seems pretty conclusive that it's the shutter, though if anyone wants to dispute the claim I'm game to entertain it :-) Guess it's off to the shop...

Asked by djangodude

Answer

My guess for the shutter speed in the comment was based ob the approximate width of the bright strip relative to the image width, multiplied by the sync-speed. I assumed a 1/250sec sync speed.

Just a speculation: it looks like the shutter blades get stuck for an brief instance around the middle of the frame. It is possible that you have a piece of dirt stuck there, or that the spring or rails are about to fail. Try to decrease and increase the speed by a stop and see if the stripe gets twice as wide and as narrow. If so, it is indicative that it is indeed the shutter having a problem.

UPDATE after the mystery was resolved - I'd think the first thing to do (OK, maybe the second) would be to remove the lens and have a look at the internals... but that's just me ;-)

Answered by ysap

Check more discussion of this question.

What will happen to a camera if the relative humidity drops to less than 35%?

Question

What will happen to a camera that is stored in an environment with a very low relative humidity?

Will the camera crack, or what will happen?

Will it be the same for DSLRs, non-weatherproof point & shoot cameras, and for weatherproof point & shoot cameras?

Asked by Jack

Answer

In a word, static.

Digital cameras are electronic devices, and they also have moving parts, both plastic and metal. This is a great combination for build-up of static charge and for sparks to fly.

These sparks — even very, very tiny ones — can cause malfunction of the electronics or even permanent damage.

If the camera is just stored in low humidity and not powered on, a problem is less likely.

Your original list-based question implied that there's some sort of magic level, with different behavior at each threshold. That's not the case. It's just that the risk goes up as humidity goes down.

Answered by mattdm

Check more discussion of this question.

Does a digital camera lose its abilities in taking photos if it is left without use or used too often?

Question

One of my friends mention to me that a digital camera (especially of the Superzoom type) will lose its abilities in taking photos (as compared when it was first brought) if it is left without use for a period of three months or more.

Another friend mention that it is overuse which will result in the camera not taking as good photo as before it was first bought.

So, does a digital camera (especially the Superzoom) really lose its abilities in taking good photos if it is left without using for a period of time or used too often?

Asked by Jack

Answer

No. It does not. I own currently 7 digital cameras and I have used some after being unused for over two years without any problems.

Even the Lithium-Ion battery still had some charge after that period. Those who use AAs will note that rechargeable NiMh ones lose their charge after a month or two unless they are Imedion or Eneloop (low-self-discharge).

Lenses may jam as oil form on aperture blades I was told but even after not using lenses for years at a time (which I currently have over 30) I have never seen it happen. Some super-zooms do not even have aperture blades at all, so that won't apply to them.

All in all, I expect cameras with more mechanical parts like DSLRs to fail first due to use. Some small cameras do not even have mechanical shutters either, so there is one less thing which can fail.

Answered by Itai

Check more discussion of this question.

How can I easily tell if a sensor or lens is damaged?

Question

I am pretty interested in recognizing any damage to digital camera in very low level (without any advanced tests).

For example, how can I identify the damage of a sensor or lens? If there are any ways to identify that the camera was dropped or physically damaged. I am pretty sure we can say it based on photo, or may be camera has any kind of sensor.

Asked by com

Answer

Unless there is obvious or visible damage or dysfunction, minor issues can be quite hard to determine. You can severely compromise the front element of a lens and it will still mostly work. However a scratch on a rear element will be much more noticeable. But you can have dust in a lens or camera body with little or no noticeable effects.

If you have the ability to see images produced by a lens or camera body you can look for some things such as dark spots, which may indicate dust or dirt on the lens, or banding which may indicate some deeper malfunction. For a lens, the most common problems show up as poor focus, or uneven focus across an image.

If you are asking before you buy, just make sure you have some reasonable amount of trust in who you are purchasing from. In general, photography equipment holds up very well, if taken reasoanble care of.

Answered by cadmium

Check more discussion of this question.

Is it worth getting third-party warranties on lenses?

Question

I've just taken the plunge & ordered a refurbished Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 lens. Refurbished & on sale, it's still expensive -- about as much as my T1i + other lenses put together! I think my primary usage warrants it, but this still makes me a bit tense.

The Canon warranty on refurbished products is just 90 days. In that time, I'll certainly play with it, try to test sharpness, etc., so I will hopefully feel confident it's not a lemon. But given that this is a small, valuable, highly portable item, is it worth getting a third-party warranty on it?

Asked by khedron

Answer

It would help to know if you're an amateur or professional. If it's for professional/paid use then it should be listed on your insurance anyway. Insurance takes care of liability and equipment problems.

If you're an amateur then you might consider a personal articles policy for insuring your equipment. In the US camera equipment is not generally covered by homeowners or rental insurance. If you obtain third party insurance then it will cover not only damage but also theft and misuse. In my opinion, this is much more valuable than a third party warranty.

Here in the US a good option is a personal articles rider on your homeowner's insurance. You can cover a pretty significant dollar value of equipment for a small yearly fee.

Answered by nwcs

Check more discussion of this question.

Can I damage an IS lens by moving it too quickly?

Question

The other day, I was using my Canon 500D with the EF-S 55-250 IS lens. A couple of times after focusing I tried to recompose the picture, and noticed the image in the view finder suddenly shifted.

I'm assuming this was caused by the IS mechanism trying to keep the image stabilized, and then all of a sudden giving up as I moved the camera too far and too quickly.

I'm guessing this is something I want to try to avoid, but could I actually damage the lens by doing this?

Asked by Tom Jefferys

Answer

I very much doubt you can damage the lens in this way, the glass that the IS system moves is designed to be very light so as to have low inertial stiffness so it can move quickly and accurately. This same trait means it should be able to move against any momentum you put into the lens.

Empirically having seen the way some people abuse their super-teles (300 & 400 f/2.8) I think Canon would have had it by now if their IS system wasn't robust.

Answered by Matt Grum

Check more discussion of this question.

Using carbon-fiber tripods in cold weather: safe temperatures, precautions, and effects of failure

Question

I'm considering buying Manfrotto 055CXPRO3 carbon-fiber tripod legs with a Manfrotto 498RC2 ball head, but I've read that carbon fiber can break at low temperatures.

• How cold an environment can I safely use a carbon-fiber tripod in, and what precautions should I take?
• What would happen in the event the carbon fiber fails? Is there a significant health or safety hazard beyond equipment damage?

Asked by DragonLord

Answer

Carbon fiber can take quite a hell of a beating, both in terms of environment (water, sand, snow) and temperature. I've heard a lot of people discussing or complaining about how carbon fiber is susceptible to extreme cold, however I think most of it is hearsay and speculation.

There are only a couple times when I've read something regarding carbon fiber being fragile at cold temperatures...but the use of the word "cold" was always lacking. You would need to spend a night out on the frozen ice pack of the most northern reaches of Alaska during the heart of winter (which is actually what all of the verifiable accounts of broken carbon fiber 'pod legs I've read described...usually in relation to photographing the auroras) to actually experience cold enough temperatures for it to actually pose a serious problem. Most carbon fiber tripods these days are multi-layered, weaved or braided, and resin-reinforced. In the average case for cold, you may crack a layer if you slammed a leg with enough force, but it would take a pretty extreme freeze, well, well below zero, to run the risk of actually cracking a leg all the way through or shattering one completely.

As for precautions, if you are using your tripod at -20 or below, you need to make sure you don't slam it or strike it with anything hard. Dropping your pack or bag on hard snow pack or ice with the pod strapped to the outside is a sure way to crack or shatter it at extreme temps. You can crack a leg by pulling it too hard when setting it up, so you need to be careful with that as well. Section releases can ice up, and wrenching them too hard at cold temperatures may cause cracking, so its best to ease into it. Better yet, extend one or two of the sections before you get out into the extreme cold, and only extend the last sections if you absolutely have to (most of the articles I've read on aurora photography seem to indicate that you'll probably be sitting in a chair anyway, so full extension is often not required in the first place.) Once set up, you'll want to make sure you don't slam any of the legs with anything hard...such as the camera, any other gear, a flashlight, etc.

If for whatever reason you DID shatter a leg, I don't know of any specific health hazards. I've always heard carbon fiber was a pretty stable, safe, environmentally friendly product, so I wouldn't worry about that. Its unlikely it would break cleanly, especially if you have a layered product like a tripod leg. Its likely to leave a rough edge, so I would be aware of that and make sure you don't scrape your stab yourself with any broken ends.

Answered by jrista

Check more discussion of this question.

How to use a tripod on the beach without damaging it?

Question

The site already has a good example of what to consider in regards to camera and lenses around sand, but I specifically am wondering what considerations to make when using a tripod near sand. Many years ago I took a cheap tripod with lever style legs, and sand really wrecked the entire tripod. I am hoping this time to avoid that issue. Is there a style of tripod that might be better, and how can I use it in such a way to limit any long term damage?

I don't have any specific shots in mind, just likely some long exposure night shots of the beach resort, and I might get it out in the day time for some self portraits.

Asked by dpollitt

Answer

In addition to @Itai's answer, I'd like to add, if you don't want to spend 1200$ on a tripod just to protect it from sands, you can use a little care, or on extreme situations, alternative DIY methods.

I also wrecked a tripod (not totally wrecked, but the sands kind of jammed the levers on the legs) by using it near a beach on a windy day. The next time I took some plastic (polythene) bags, cut them into long pieces (3" width) and adhesive tapes to put them around the leg lever joints like bandages. Worked like a charm. The only problem is, once you tape them in, you lose the ability to adjust the tripod height by extending the legs, otherwise this is good enough if you're not planning to go all out beach shooting. Adjust the tripod height before applying the tapes and you're good to go for that day.

And after the shooting, get to a safe place and use a rocket blower to blow off any accidental remaining sand particles near the lever joints just to be on the safe side.

DISCLAIMER: This method doesn't look pretty.

Additional Tips:

• Accept the fact that a tripod is a tool, it's OK if it gets dirty. Metal tripods will eventually corrode if you expose it to salt water on a regular basis. Get a carbon fiber tripod to prevent corrosion.
• Make it a practice to always extend the lowest section to keep the joints out of the sand.
• A broad sand "shoe" is useful in both sand and mud to keep the leg from sinking.
• If the tripod gets dirty, keep it extended until you can clean it.
• Any decent quality tripod will take many, many years to corrode to the point it really matters with occasional exposure to sand/salt water. So, open up all the legs, wash and rinse it thoroughly using clean water and wipe it dry before storing it.

Answered by ShutterBug

Check more discussion of this question.

Is there any damage that a lens can have that is unrepairable?

Question

Just wondering after I dropped my lens and had it repaired is there any specific kind of damage that would ruin a lens to the point where you'd be better just buying another used one.

I'm specifically curious about mold, as I've heard stories of that destroying lens elements, but couldn't you just replace those elements?

I'm asking this question to help make decisions about cost effectiveness of preventive measures.

For exampe, if mold dmg can be easily repaired then I won't invest in a dehumidifier case for my lens.

Answer

Since lens replacement parts exist and there are people who know how to disassemble and assemble lenses you can say that theoretically there is no damage that can't be fixed -

However in the real world there are kinds of damage that the manufacturers won't fix and even more kinds of damage where the cost of fixing would be more than the cost of replacing the lens.

Everything below this line is second hand information because I've never personally sent a lens to be fixed, I don't guaranty this information is correct and I will gladly edit or remove this answer if someone that has more experience or official information answers.

• I've heard from multiple people who tried to get mold damage fixed and the companies just returned the lens as "can't fix", so I believe it's highly likely companies will not fix mold damage.

• I've also heard of cases where lens companies won't replace broken inner elements, I don't know if this is a general thing or specific to some lens models.

• And finally I've been told that the front element is always replaceable and that it's one of the cheapest things to fix in a lens - I've only heard this from one source (as part of a "why you shouldn't use a protective filter" speech) so I don't consider this information reliable.

Check more discussion of this question.

Can the sun damage the camera sensor? Under what conditions?

Question

I want to experiment taking photos where the sun appears. I'm afraid of what might happen if I take one with a narrower angle (where sun would be bigger). Can the lens act as a magnifying glass and burn the CCD or CMOS sensor?

EDIT

Since my query is a little bit obvious, I will reformulate it to:

Under which circumstances (zoom, exposition, aperture, etc...), can the sensor be damaged by the sun?

Answer

Taking direct photos of the sun can destroy your camera, not to mention your eyes. It's exactly as you are afraid, the lens will act as a magnifier and multiply the suns intensity right on your cameras internals. What this effects can vary. Long exposures against the sun can cause permanent damage to your camera's sensor, but besides that, your camera's shutter curtains, and af sensors are also at risk when shooting right at the sun.

Now, taking photos of sunset and sunrises is okay, as is taking photos in direct sunlight (though this does require some finesse to get a good exposure), but pointing your lens right at the sun is not recommended (especially for long exposures).

Check more discussion of this question.

Can using an old flash damage a new DSLR?

Question

I have been using my dad's old Metz mecablitz 18 B1 flash for a while with my Canon 7D and had no trouble with it, but just received some advice from a friend that using old flashes can fry the camera. Is this true? And if so, is there a safe way to use it (I'm trying to avoid having to buy a new flash – but also would like not to destroy my camera). The flash takes 3 x AA batteries and has a single hotshoe connection.

Answer

Yes the trigger voltage on some old flashes is too high for modern electronic cameras.

There is a page on botzilla Photo Strobe Trigger Voltages which lists many old flash units. I don't see your dad's flash model there, but the 20 B3 model had a trigger voltage of 168 volts.

According to this thread on photo.net, the 7D can handle up to 250V, so that flash may be safe with your camera, even if it does have a high voltage like the B3 model

There is further information on dpanswers on safe voltages for Canon and Nikon, and also how to measure the trigger voltage of a flash.

Check more discussion of this question.

Could a filter damage the curved front element of the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM?

Question

I just got the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM and I really want to put a UV filter on the lens to protect the front element, but I feel uneasy screwing one on because of the curved front element. I feel that if I screw in the filter all the way, the front element will rub against the filter and will scratch or at the very least put unecessary pressure on the glass.

The filter I have is Tiffen 58mm that I used previously with my kit lens.

I tried to put a small piece of tissue in the center of the filter and then screwed it on and it seems that the tissue is getting depressed :S I really want to love this lens, but why couldnt they just make the filter thread sticking out further?

Has anyone else experienced issues with filters for this lens?

What about ultra thin filters? Would that help anyway or do they have the same thread depth? Never used one before.

Answer

There might be a chance where certain lens-filter combination can result in the filter touching the surface of the lens. Even if they do not actually make contact, the gap can get to be so small that some dust particle could get squeezed in between and cause damage.

I suggest the following to find if the filter gets too close to the lens: Put your filter on a table, lens side up and pour a drop of lens cleaning fluid in the center. Then screw the lens into the filter without taking it off the table (both must be completely dust free to avoid any damage). Unscrew the lens and observe if the lens is wet. If it is, the filter is too close. Wipe the lens an then the filter with lens cleaning tissue or a quality microfiber cloth.

If you get to prove that the filter touches the lens (or simply want to make sure you wont get any damage from it), you can get the ring out of a somewhat cheap filter and remove the glass, and use that ring between your lens and the filter. Just watch out for vignettes!

Check more discussion of this question.

Are airport x-ray scanners safe for DSLRs / lenses / storage media?

Question

While traveling by air here in India, one is instructed to remove all electronics like cell phones / media players / laptops and pass them thru the X-ray scanners separate from the rest of one's hand baggage (carry-on).

Is a modern-day DSLR (specifically a Nikon D90 / D3100) and the SD card contained within affected? Is is safe to pass it thru or do I insist on a manual check and bypass the X-ray machine if possible?

Answer

I've done a lot of travel with dSLR equipment and cards, I've never had an issue, it's safe to send through. The issue, historically, was with film since x-rays are light and could affect the film.

Check more discussion of this question.

Will long exposure night shots damage my camera?

Question

I've been looking into long exposure photography for star tracking. How does it negatively (if at all) affect your camera?

Answer

There might be some repercussions, especially on very cold or hot nights. Long exposures and continuous use of the sensor does cause it to heat up. This is really not that much of a problem for most modern cameras as they have adequate heat sinks and other features to bleed off heat and prevent too much buildup. (Some newer cameras may even prevent you from starting a new shot for a while if it detects the sensor is too hot.)

On extremely cold nights, you might encounter some trouble with your batteries, as cold tends to reduce their effectiveness and life. Poor current flow can occur during extremely cold or very hot nights, which can mess with the camera's electronics itself. This sometimes manifests as funky menu behavior and the like. I have not seen any permanent damage from such a thing, but I have also never spent a truly extensive amount of time photographing in very cold weather (probably the longest was during a total lunar eclipse which spanned several hours in sub-freezing temps.)

LCD displays perform poorly in very cold environments as well, and can end up damaged due to extreme cold. Most normal cold temperatures won't be a problem, but sub-freezing temps with an added windchill can bleed off every scrap of energy held in a camera, sometimes resulting in dead LCD pixels or possibly worse damage. Normally, you'll encounter problems due to poor battery performance, however if you are doing something like taking a time-lapse sequence of shots over the duration of a whole night, and intend to sleep through much of the night...you might want to pick nights that are not extremely cold. There really is no telling what super cold temperatures might do to your equipment if its exposed for an extended duration of time.

Weather sealed gear is obviously going to hold up better in more abusive conditions, however most sealed gear is only available in the top of the line equipment. Most cheaper gear has minimal weather sealing or resistance features, if it has any at all.

Check more discussion of this question.

Are these ghost light spots and vertical grain indication that my scratched polarizer is ruined?

Question

Earlier, I unfortunately dropped my polarizer. There doesn't seem to be any damage save for a light scratch which I've uncovered only after a very thorough inspection. Nonetheless, I'm worried that there is damage worse than that.

The following feature all the same subject, a Christmas Tree in front of my department's building. This is my first time shooting suchlike subjects so I'm unsure if my polarizer is damaged or if the effects are something I should expect given my subject.

Set-up: Sony SLT-A35 with 55mm lens. Only thing on my lens is a Kenko polarizer.

First look at those "ghost colors" at the top left part of the tree. No matter how I turn the polarizer, they just won't go. But farther away from the subject and it's fine; they don't appear. And yes, I tried removing the polarizer while in this frame and distance and the ghost colors did disappear.

For example: http://chadestioco.deviantart.com/art/Christmas-Tree-Scrap-270316470

Should be pretty obvious what I'm talking about.

They respond to the polarizer the way glare does; that is they decrease/increase in intensity but never go away, at least not at that particular frame.

I have a close-up shot where the ghost colors didn't appear. See "Christmas Lights Scrap 2" in my DA scrapbook.

And then there's another thing that bothers me: some grain in my other shots. I'm not sure what/how they look like to you but it doesn't look like anything ISO-related to me.

Full picture at http://chadestioco.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d4gxt9o . Enlarge/view full image, around lower left of the tree, running from the grass lawn to the sidewalk ledge. Hope you can get what I'm talking about.

This is the most distinct I can find. As far as I've inspected my other shots, they all run vertical.

Also, I have some non-dark shots with my dropped polarizer and I don't see anything troubling with them. See "Front Facing Facade" in my DA gallery.

So, is my polarizer dead? Suggestions as to what I do with it?

Answer

1) extra images are just reflections from the polarizer. How can you tell? When you rotate it, they don't move. Therefore the angle doesn't matter, nor does the scratch matter. When you remove it, they go away. Therefore it must be causing it, but it is not related to the scratch or the angle being polarized.

2) The noise is just electronic noise. The higher you go in ISO the worse the noise gets. You can use noise reduction in post processing to remove it, but this has a price, you'll also loose fine detail and the image can start looking plasticky. You shot at 1600 ISO. Don't do that unless there isn't any other way to get the shot. Try again at ISO 100. Yeah, the shutter speed won't be 1/13, it will be much longer, so use a tripod.

Check more discussion of this question.

Why does fungus form in lenses, and how to get rid of it?

Question

Recently I was using an old Pentax 50mm f/2 that had a quite big green spot, and later I was informed that it was a fungus.

A couple of questions raised from this:

1. Why does fungus form inside the lenses? What kind of "food" does it find in a glass element?
2. How does it form? Due to condensation? Due to bad storage?
3. Does it have any impact in the final image? Some scratches in a lens will probably not appear in the image because to they will be very out of focus. Is this also true for fungus?
4. Finally, when a lens is "fungused": How do you get rid of it?

---

What to do about mold/fungus in a camera lens?

by Yuttadhammo

I am living in a tropical country where humidity is pretty high. I never thought it would be possible that something could grow inside a lens, so I haven't been so careful with my canon camcorder. Now I see there is a white spore growing on the inside of the camera lens (see photo below). Is there any way, short of finding a camera shop (doubtful there are any in the country that can handle this), to remove this?

The spore is the white dot in the centre (it's opaque), and the dusty patch on the right of the lens is also on the inside, must be the same stuff.

Answer

For all the following: YMMV*, caveat emptor, no responsibility taken for advice given, you decide whether to try this at home. It may even work :-). Be aware that damage may already be fatal and/or that fatal (to the lens) damage may occur along the way. Best attitude is to regard the lens as a writeoff now, with anything you can gain from it by the methods below being a bonus.

Fungus in a lens will always degrade the image but the amount of degradation may be invisible to mere mortals or may make the lens completely unusable by any standards. Often even a very visually significant lens defect - such as a chip or scratch, will not be instantly obvious in final images to a casual observer. Experts will usually be able to detect almost any defect (or say they can - mere mortals will not be able to tell if they are correct :-) ). Also, lens settings will affect how much a given defect affects a given image.

In some cases the advice given in 1a and 1b below will transform results from generally unacceptable to generally acceptable. In other cases they won't. Only trying it will tell you how good a method will be.

The best advice (but too late :-( ) is to never let it happen. Fungus only grows in moist conditions. Keep your lenses in a well ventilated dry location with dessicant sachets. However -

If it's inside the lens there are two options (apart from disposal). Unfortunately, while either may work, neither is certain to work well.

• 1(a) Shining UV (ultraviolet) light into the lens for an extended period will "discourage" the fungus, how well and how long is uncertain. Simply leaving a lens with iris fully open on a sun facing window ledge in a dry location for weeks to months may produce good results. Cap lens at rear, and tilt so that sun shines into lens during sunnier parts of each day. (Be ware that sun shining directly along the axis of the lens or close to it may focus light onto end cap and melt it - unlikely but check point and degree of focus.) I tried this procedure with an extremely old Minolta 50mm f1:1.4? manual lens and achieved tolerable results. I simply left the lens as above for many months and when I next looked found that mold presence had been very substantially reduced.

  1(b) Light from a germicidal (short wavelength) UV lamp may be used in place of sunlight. This sort of light can blind you or damage your eyes permanently if looked at for substantial periods and can cause "arc eye" - painful but usually temporary inflammation of the eye. This does not mean you should not use such lights at all - simply that they need to be used with due respect. These lights are available from many sources for many purposes and can be very low cost.

  Note that "black light" UV light is not suitable for this purpose. It is longer wavelength and not very biologically active.

  Note also that the short wavelength high energy UV (which is why you are using it) from germicidal UV lamps will also degrade other materials such as some plastics and miscellaneous other material - including, possibly, parts of a plastic lens housing. This depends on material, distance, light energy and exposure time. YMMV but caveat emptor - ie know that you are using a tool with sharp unguarded blades (even though you can't see them) and use with due caution.

  All the above may put some people off UV germicidal lamps. If so, that's good. They are a great and useful tool but not suitable for use by careless or unthinking people.

• 2 . Dismantle and clean. If the lens is so degraded that it is unusable and if the method above does not work well enough then the lens must be dismantled. If the lens is otherwise a 'writeoff" and you are competent mechanically you may wish to try this yourself. Reassembly of a lens capsule is considered to be an expert task and realignment on reassembly may require arcane knowledge. This is why qualified lens servicing people are still in business and cost money to use.

  Fungus often attacks lens surface coatings and may etch the glass itself so the lens may be noticeably or fatally degraded regardless. How much the may/may/may applied in your case is tbd. Some lens cleaning works very well indeed. An aficionado and a good MTR test will probably tell you that something has happened but the results may be very tolerable in practice.

  You will find articles on the internet on lens cleaning methods. I read a paper by either Zeiss or Leitz that suggested that cigarette ash makes an excellent fine cleaning compound (!!!).

---

• YMMV - Your mileage may vary.

• Caveat emptor - let the buyer beware = you are on your own.

Check more discussion of this question.

What to do about mold/fungus in a camera lens?

Question

I am living in a tropical country where humidity is pretty high. I never thought it would be possible that something could grow inside a lens, so I haven't been so careful with my canon camcorder. Now I see there is a white spore growing on the inside of the camera lens (see photo below). Is there any way, short of finding a camera shop (doubtful there are any in the country that can handle this), to remove this?

EDIT: new photo. The spore is the white dot in the centre (it's opaque), and the dusty patch on the right of the lens is also on the inside, must be the same stuff.

Answer

The only course of action here is to get the lens professionally serviced. Once mould spores have got into your lens and started to grow like this there is no other way to get rid of them. In order to prevent this in the future always store your camera in a sealed bag with a couple of sachets of silica granules to absorb any moisture that may have got into the camera during use. This is especially important if your in very humid environments or if the camera has got at all wet.

Check more discussion of this question.