Imagemaster wrote:
Spider wrote:
Gerry Szarek wrote:
.....then buy some alcohol at a local drug store. You could use Q-tips.....
Gerry

Well, I wouldn’t use the alcohol from a local drug store, because it may not be pure enough and most likely it will leave some residue on the sensor, same goes for Q-tips, it will leave some lint……What you need is Eclipse:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/476977-REG/Photographic_Solutions_E2DCS_Eclipse_E2_Cleaning_Fluid.html

and lint-free pec-pad wipes:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/71154-REG/Photographic_Solutions_PAD44DCS_Pec_Pad_Photo_Wipes_.html



Isopropyl alcohol (rubbing alcohol) is so pure enough for cleaning a sensor. Mix it with 50% water and use a Q-tip slightly dampened with the solution (not soaking wet). After doing a wet swab of the sensor, buff the sensor with dry Q-tips. Use a blower to get rid of any lint.

You may have to repeat several times, but it is a lot cheaper and works just as well as all the gimmicky, over-priced commercial products. Has worked fine for me on 1D, 10D, 20D, 1DMk2.

Come on folks, it is not rocket science, just similar to cleaning windows.



OK, before your use this method try it on your lens…clean the front element and see the results and then if you still satisfied clean the sensor……good luck

Spider wrote:
[OK, before your use this method try it on your lens…clean the front element and see the results and then if you still satisfied clean the sensor……good luck

There is, of course, no harm in cleaning your front element. However, stuff on the front element is nearly always completely invisible in photographs. Feel free to stick some stuff to the front of your lens and test if you want, but I'm certain of this.

Dan

Cableaddict wrote: this is the first I've heard that the LPF was put it backwards, though that could certainly be. Is this verifiable?

No, because that was just some early speculation before people understood that the 5D sensor was the first one that Canon had made that didn't have a glass cover.

In the earlier sensor stack designs, the frontmost layer was a glass cover with a dichroic IR-reflective coating on the back. The coating was toward the rest of the stack and thus protected. Occasionally Canon had been known to get this cover on backwards, with the dichroic coating exposed.

With the 5D, Canon saved some money by getting rid of that glass cover and coating the front of the frontmost low pass filter with the dichroic coating. This is clearly described in Canon's White Paper on the 5D. So on the 5D, the camera is designed to have the dichroic coating exposed. (All of the dust-shaker cameras, too.)

What I read was that Canon used a different material for the coating.

That was more speculation, and possibly correct but my guess is probably not. According to Photographic Solutions, maker of Eclipse fluid, Canon says that the issue is "a result of a variance in the coating on the surface of the image sensor of the EOS 5D." So the question is what do they mean by "a variance"? Is it a change in material, a change in thickness, a change in processing, or…?

Dust-Aid quotes a company that does coatings: "It is possible for coatings to be weak if, during it's lamination process, insufficient heat was applied to the coating or if the surface of the glass was not prepared properly. This weakness in the coating could easily lead to bond failure when cleaned."

Dust-Aid also says that Canon Factory Service claims that "all of Canon's low pass filters are made the same so there is no difference between them" to which Dust-Aid says, "we do not agree with Canon's statement that all of their low pass filters are made the same." (linked page)

Either way, is there any documentation as to what serial numbers are in question? My 5D is second generation, I believe, ser # 2221 200093.

It's not clear to me that it really is a matter of serial numbers. Photographic Solutions originally said that it was only a problem on early production 5Ds, but has removed that statement from their page linked above.

Dust-Aid believes that there is a visible difference between the low-pass filters, and provides photos on their page linked above. I can't tell if they're right about that, either.

I am petrified of swabbing it, even with Eclipse, until I know for sure.

Photographic Solutions will pay for any damage if you follow their directions, including using Sensor Swabs instead of Pec*Pads, and if you send the damaged camera to them instead of directly to Canon.

Dust-Aid says on their page linked above, "If you discover that you have a below standard coated filter from Canon, which Dust-Aid has de-coated, we will replace the filter for you."

Thanks, Doug. Great info.

Somewhat disturbing, though. First, Dust aid will only replace the LPF if you damage it following their instructions. their instructions now include using their special "5D only" pads. Those pads cannot possibly be as effective, yet 5D owners have no choice but to use them, unless we can verify the serial number thing.

You say you doubt it's ser # based, but you don't say why. I am still guessing it is, because Canon had a massive recall of the early 5D's. They never admitted what the problem was, and it was most likely bad glue, causing some mirror boxes to come loose under hot conditions (that IS verifiable) and some LPF's to open up on the sides (causing even worse dust problems)

-but it could also have been the coatings. Or not. Maybe they made a 2-year supply of sensors right at the start, to save costs, and there was a bad run. I saw the "color" thing you mention on the Dust Aid website. Took a look at my sensor in strong light, hoping to see a nice magenta color as on the "good" one. Sadly, with the sensor in-camera it looks deep green. No way to tell, I guess.

So now what to do? Use the less-effective product from dust aid, or use their regular product or Eclipse or whatever?

I'm surprised Canon hasn't been raked over the rails for (obviously) lying about this. It literally makes me consider Nikon for the future, though I suppose they're just as bad. Corporate mentality & all.

Cableaddict wrote: You say you doubt it's ser # based, but you don't say why.

There are 2 "why's"… first, that Photographic Solutions no longer claims that the problem is limited to early production units. Second, that serial numbers might not be a good indicator of production date anyway. The serial numbers on the early 1D mk III units that were recalled for the AF problem were all over the place. Rob Galbraith says, "He [Chuck Westfall] further stresses that the 3450 EOS-1D Mark IIIs are not refurbished and are in fact all factory new, with the obvious implication being that Canon doesn't always build the camera with sequentially-higher serial numbers or that are even in numeric order at times."

Thanks.

I read somewhere that the 5D's did go sequentially, but only as regards the FIFTH number.

Thus, the first run (with the glue problem) all had a "1" as the fifth number, and these were specifically the ones Canon recalled. The second run had a "2" for the fifth number, etc.
A Canon tech also told me this on the phone.

I have no idea if that's true, but it would not conflict with what you are saying, since the FIRST number could be anything.

This also doesn't mean that the problems are only in the early models, so as you say it does not automatically mean that the problem follows the serial numbers, but it probably does.
Photographic Solutions could have changed their wording simply to protect themselves, "just in case."

Heck, who knows....

I clean my 5D sensor with a Rocket Blower and Lens Pens (see Art Morris' site birdsasart.com). Scares the heck out me every time, but I've never had a problem.

The vacuum cleaner idea is not well thought out. If you seal the opening you will likely damage the innards; if you don't seal it, you draw a load of room air into the works.

I'm back from CA now and have plenty of image editing to do to get rid of the dust spots. The only other camera shop that I could find in the Santa Cruz area was Wolf Camera. While the guy there was trying to be real helpful, he suspected by dirty lens was the culprate (I was suspicious); After cleaning that, no change.

I took the camera in to my local camera shop that cleaned the sensor and focusing screen at no charge. They use oiless compressed air only on the sensor. I picked up the camera and they said, "all clean".

Test shots later show that the dust is much better (much less of it), but there are still 6-8 spots. Not sure where to go from there here. Using a Q-Tip is a bit scary. I'm also not sure I could even see the dust on the sensor.

a quick question...would Purosol work in cleaning the sensor? I'm out of Eclispe E2, but will order some, just wondering if Purosol is safe.

success!

I used the q tip method on my 5d.
I put some lens cleaning solution on the q tip (3-4 drops) and gave the sensor a good wet clean. (takes any grease off). Making sure to get in all the corners and along the edges. I found putting the q tip on an angle and spinning back and forth got the corners.

I then used a dry q tip to dry the sensor and to remove any smudges and dust.
I then blew with a blower while camera on the side and upside down intensively.

This q tip method took me from 10 plus spots plus, to absolutely none.

I am very happy with the results.
Thank you to the original q tip poster.

I repeated a few times until I found the order above to be most successful.

Before arriving at this I tried

arctic butterfly - I did not find it worked. Seemed like a very expensive brush that just smears the sensor.

scotch tape - Leaves residue, no good.

It was a bit of a journey especially when at one stage I found out the piece of paper I was photographing had dust on it! I probably cleaned 3 times before noticing that one.

I use the Visible Dust stuff. sensor brush does the trick most of the time. an occasional chamber clean helps keep the crud down before it hits the sensor; and the sensor clean does the trick for sure if you end up with nasty splotches on the cover glass. The trick is to just be careful...

I rarely have to clean the sensor on my 5d, but when I do, it's extremely easy...

I use lens pens. They're easy to carry, easy to clean, and the best thing is they absolutely won't harm the glass covering your sensor. I have never used a wet cleaning solution, nor a sticky pad process to clean a sensor.

Closely Guarded Secret: Canon service centers have used, and probably still do use, lens pens to clean sensors...

I also use a pec pad in the process. I swipe gently with the pen, wipe it on the pec pad, swipe, wipe, swipe, wipe...continue for 20-30 seconds until done... Easy, extremely inexpensive, no grease, no muss, no fuss.. Been doing it for years. Stuck on bacon grease? No problem.. Spaghetti and a meat ball or two on your sensor? No problem. Pigeon droppings because you changed lenses in the middle of a sh#t storm? Well, OK, potential problem..

N.B. I have different size lens pens depending on what I'm trying to do. I have the large ones that I can use on lenses, but I use the small ones for the sensors. The lens pen cleaning surface is like a round disk, but they also have then with triangular corners so you can get stuff out of the corners.


Some of the biggest lies ever told and spread like a STD in camera forums are:

1) The 5d is a dust magnet. BS, with a capital BS. All my other bodies have been just the same or even worse (20d many years ago), even those with the built-in Canon 1D3 sensor cleaning gimmick that doesn't work but does add cost to bodies...
2) Sensor cleaning is hard to do
3) Nikon ergonomics are good (how'd that get in there?)

For those that want to insist, or simply believe that sensor cleaning is something to be feared, that it's dangerous work and one never knows if it will result in damaged sensor coverings or possible loss of life, please bring your cameras to me. For $50 each, I'll clean it and give you a free lens pen on your way out the studio door 61 seconds later.

Heck, at that bill rate I'll give up shooting for clients and just clean sensors.

Cableaddict wrote:
I read somewhere that the 5D's did go sequentially, but only as regards the FIFTH number. Thus, the first run (with the glue problem) all had a "1" as the fifth number, and these were specifically the ones Canon recalled. The second run had a "2" for the fifth number, etc.
A Canon tech also told me this on the phone.

Cabbleaddict,

You've got to take what a "Canon techie" tells you with a grain of salt. What he told you just doesn't make any sense regarding the 5D issue.

FWIW, all of the 5D's that had the coatings eroded had similar numbering in 2 of the digits. A couple of people did the research on the internet and saw the same pattern with the serial numbers and this coincides with the information given to me by a couple of companies. Now, follow me here, I do NOT know if any other company (which has been mentioned in this thread) encountered problems with 5D's not from this sequence/batch. If they did, this is information is not privy to me and there could well be other reasons besides a misapplication of the coating for this happening.

I have a D300 which has an ITO-coated sensor and I have been using Ecipse on it since I bought it. Photographic Solutions tested a Canon supplied 5D sensor assembly and actually tried to remove the coating with a PecPad and Eclipse and E2. They couldn't do it. But one of the posters is correct, if you want a set of tools that is guaranteed to NOT damage your sensor, then get the recommended kit from Photographic Solutions. If you deviate by using PecPads or a different swab or fluid, then there is no guarantee in place.

E2 has a small percentage of water, so it is a weaker solvent of the two that may ocassionaly leave streaks. That is why many people prefer Eclipse to E2. The decision to take advantage of a company's guarantee is yours, but in the real world of sensor dust, I can tell you that Eclipse or E2 and PecPads, when used according to the instructions, will not damage any coating that has been properly applied to the sensor surface.

Regards,
Nicholas
www.copperhillimages.com

Paul Gerard wrote:

.......Before arriving at this I tried

arctic butterfly - I did not find it worked. Seemed like a very expensive brush that just smears the sensor.

Sorry to hear you bought a VD product. You can be glad knowing that what they paid $2.00 for, you paid at least $100.

Thieves....

This has probably been answered but I've wet cleaned my 5D sensor many times. Not a big deal once you get used to it. I used the stuff from the arctic butterfly site.

jamesf99 wrote:
Paul Gerard wrote:

.......Before arriving at this I tried

arctic butterfly - I did not find it worked. Seemed like a very expensive brush that just smears the sensor.

Sorry to hear you bought a VD product. You can be glad knowing that what they paid $2.00 for, you paid at least $100.

Thieves....



+1 I bought mine cause I saw a magazine article raving about them .Stupid me...(bought it awhile back. I'm smarter now and just buy swabs)