D610 to be announced within 48 hours (as of 10/5)

Started Oct 6, 2013 | Discussions
Nikonfan99 Senior Member • Posts: 1,411
Re: and no one ever really walked on the moon..

I saw it as some kind of personality trait or just trying to cause drama. I reposted his previous comments about d600/d800 users that he made on another thread. Basically he was making fun of the users on these forums and the issues they have. He basically does not own the camera but wants to cause drama for some unknown reason.

As of today, Thom Hogan wrote an article about the issue specific to the D600. I will save you the reading and here is what he had to say about wet cleaning:

“It is normal for all modern DSLRs with fast shutters to sometimes throw a bit of lubricant towards the sensor, so seeing a couple of such spots, especially early in the life of a camera, isn't something to get too concerned about. Yes, it needs a special wet cleaning (typically I use Visible Dust's Smear Away fluid, let the sensor completely dry out, then clean again with a regular wet cleaning fluid). I believe every sophisticated DSLR user has to be ready to do a wet cleaning from time to time, as we want lubricated shutters that perform well for their lifetime. Small price to pay to sometimes have to do a wet clean.”

Oh my god another person (pro may I add) saying or suggesting wet cleaning a camera. I guess he is also not at the same mental capacity as our friend mark. I guess mark has the eye of a problem solver…wait he is not looking to solve anything but question people’s intelligence and skills.

May I also add one thing. Mark, since you are a stats and facts kind of guy, You say that it is not safe and should never be done. every sample I gave you says you are wrong.

Post FACTUAL proof that cleaning a sensor using the products from visible dust, copper hill images and photograhic solutions, has been proven to damage a sensor. We need hard stats from you. Yes you bring the facts. The people here, the professionals I listed and the companies I listed dont know anything so please grace us with FACTS our dear lord of the facts.

 Nikonfan99's gear list:Nikonfan99's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 650
It's still all good.

Nikonfan99 wrote:

Yes and sometimes we get people that want to argue and dont use common sense and feel that they somehow are of a higher education and know better and question others on common sense and like to argue. Life must be exhausting when you need to be right all the time and want to bleed a topic to death and can’t take things for what they are.

This is an interesting paragraph, worth exploring.

You accuse me of being unable to "take things for what they are," but have you established "what things are?"

I'm arguing that Nikon establishes "what things are."  They do it when they say, "Under no circumstance."   They have facts.

If you think that's not "what things are," what's so unreasonable about me asking for facts (as opposed to advertisements or anecdote) to justify your point?  That seems pretty fair.   Nikon says "X is so."  You say "X is not so."  Why do I get accused of being high-falutin' when I ask you how you know?  And why is it untoward of me to think critically when "how you know better" doesn't seem to involve any primary source fact?

Those aren't crazy questions.

Facts are what things are.  Anecdotes, and advertisements, and hearsay might all suggest how we want things to be, but facts are what things are.   There's a difference, and the difference matters.

C'mon, that's not such a crazy thing to point out.

It is actually very simple but you don’t get it because you want to argue with others. You know that Nikon is not even going to give you what you are asking for and will only give you the corporate line and quote you the warranty data.

Guilty as charged: I do want to argue with you about this, because I think the way you conflate fact, opinion, and assumption on this issue is problematic and not ultimately helpful.

But you're also right that I've had fine opportunity to make that point, so I won't belabor it.

You want warranty data? Stick to what you have quoted like a robot and move on. You want real world help? which actually I don’t think you even are asking for help.

I'm not.  I'm asking for factual knowledge.  Real knowledge.   Certainty.

Hunches are good, too.  Hey, hunches can point us in the direction of fact and certainty.  But hunches are *not* the same thing as fact, and there's some real hardship to be had for wishing they were--in cleaning your camera sensor and in life, in general.

You don’t even have a D600 and are wasting people’s time. Some people want to clean a sensor and use products made by companies that know a lot more on the topic and that is what it comes to.

I'm sorry that I just don't see it: you've pointed me to many resources, and none of them cite any primary source fact.  Not a one!

What's more, not a one of them offers any technical insight into what they're recommending.  If they can't point me to a Nikon guy who can talk about it, maybe they can talk about it with some specificity.  Hey guys, what's your chemical made of?  How do you know it won't damage anything?  Easy questions, but they're not answered.

And would it be so hard for the Copper Hill Imaging people (nice guys that they are) to get Nikon on the line?  And yet . . . .

Just like what we have given you is nothing, you have given nothing back.

I have given you something back--something pretty important.  I've given you a reminder that facts matter, and that facts and opinion are different.

You quote the manual and we will take the common sense route. The professionals that you feel high and mighty over,

Sorry to interrupt again, but why is it "high and mighty" of me to ask someone, somewhere, for some primary source fact?

I'm not saying these people (or you) are stupid, uneducated, incapacitated, bull-headed, dumb people.  There's no judging going on here, from me: I am noticing, only, that their speculation on this issue runs contrary to clear, fact-driven guidance ("Under no circumstance").

Yes, I am suggesting that you don't know what you think you know about this.  Why?  Because you have no facts.  Because you're presenting selected anecdote, hearsay, and advertisements as though they were facts.

But that's different than calling you a stupid human being.  I'm sure there are more than a few Nobel Laureates who know nothing about DSLR sensor cleaning, right?

(The judging--like the assuming--that's going on, here, is from you.  I ask for facts, and I get accused of being a "robot," of being "high and mighty," and of defying "common sense" for doing so.  OK.)

have used these methods since the first DSLR cameras came out. Copper Hill Images has been doing this since 2002. They are a lot more qualified on the topic compared to you.

You are an exhausting person.

I am sure having a common sense discussion with you in real life must be a joy.

Me: Nice sky right?

You: What do you mean nice sky? How do you know it is nice? Do you have scientific data sheets to show me that this sky is clean and thus considered nice? It could be polluted!!!!

(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 650
A list of irks.

Alan Brown wrote:

What irked me so much with this circular argument was calling everyone's integrity into question. Those on this forum, who 'say' they clean their sensor... well you just can't believe them.

The past tense?  Like it's over and you've achieved the last word?


What irks me so much is that you don't distinguish between being asked for specificity on this issue and being accused of not having "integrity," generally, as a person.

What irks me so much is that you don't distinguish between my calling *your* knowledge into question and my calling "everyone's integrity into question."

What irks me so much is that when I asked how we might know everyone's successful with sensor cleaning attempts, you accuse me of saying that everyone "lies" about trying to clean their sensors, at all.

That's a general slur on all visitors and also regulars who have posted of DPR for, literally, years.

What irks me so much is that you confuse anyone who questions *you*, on one issue, with casting general aspersions on "regulars who have posted of DPR for, literally, years."

Irks, irks, irks.

OP MOD TOF guy Forum Pro • Posts: 13,823
Re: "Truth is . . . "

I can only speak from my own experience. I've cleaned up the sensor from my D70 countless times. Neither camera nor user got damaged or hurt in the process

But it was a hassle. One of Olympus strong selling point at the time was that their dSLR was the only self-cleaning camera. And for good reasons.

-- hide signature --

Thierry - posted as regular forum member

 TOF guy's gear list:TOF guy's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM +5 more
Nikonfan99 Senior Member • Posts: 1,411
A message from Nicholas at copper hill images

So I sent Nicholas at Copper Hill Images a message about this topic and gave him the link to this forum.

Here is what he sent me back and stated that I can copy/paste all or some of it. Well here is all of it:

#1) Moose Peterson and Scott Kelby’s team purchased kits from us, period. We did provide Moose with extra packs of QuikStrips gratis because he has several bases/states out of which he operates. We also are providing KelbyTV with a MEGA Kit to give away during their special podcast "giveaways", the latest one coming up next week. During these podcasts, they are recommending and demonstrating to their viewers products which they have used with success. Now if someone wants to infer this is a quid pro quo, that is their choice, but it is simply the way business works that products are recommended by pros that use them. As professionals, how would their reputations go by recommending inferior products? They are experts in their fields and their opinions count - big time. Placing links to their websites on our site may increase traffic for them and vice-versa, but, again, this is how business on the internet works. We are extremely proud of our association with Moose and Scott Kelby and Dave Etchells (Imaging Resource) and several other professional photographers. We have nothing to apologize for.

#2) We make QuikStrips out of PecPads which have been used with Eclipse to clean sensors for at least 12 years. I can personally guarantee they are safe for all sensor surfaces when used according to our directions. There have been ZERO instances of this material solely damaging a filter in the 11.5 years we’ve been in business. Have people damaged their sensors with our tools? Yes, it can happen, but we maintain that QuikStrips and PecPads are 99.9% contaminant-free. Anytime a sensor has been scratched with our tools or SensorSwabs or VisibleDust swabs it had to happen by a piece of grit accidentally getting on the swab or lying on the sensor’s surface PRIOR to actually swabbing it. We would not have stayed in business as long as we have if our tools contained pieces of grit on a regular basis or if the PecPad material was abrasive and perilous to the filter. If you have some mechanical ability, patience and can follow our directions precisely, the odds of safely removing all of the dust and oil on your sensor are tremendous.

#3) Is everyone capable of safely using our system? Absolutely NOT. We go into detail about this in our tutorial; hint - some people have trouble putting toothpaste on their toothbrushes or boiling water or tying their shoelaces. If you are just getting by monetarily and you’ve borrowed funds to buy a camera, should you take the risk of cleaning it yourself? Maybe, maybe not, only you can decide.

#4) Nikon’s stance is the same as every other manufacturer - if you scratch a sensor by cleaning it yourself, you are liable for the repair. So can every D-SLR user send their cameras to Nikon whenever they need cleaning? How about the professional photographer? We are not the only company selling sensor cleaning products and we would not have stayed in business as long as we have if there wasn’t a market for our products. There is a market, why? Because it is much more practical and economical to buy the tools and do it ourselves and not have to rely or roll the dice with another entity, including Nikon Melville or L.A.
Yep, there’s a risk but there’s a risk every time you get into a car, so do you stop driving? No, you do it with great care and respect, same for sensor cleaning.

NOTE: Yes, when the D600 and D800 came out, we saw an increase in the sales of our full-frame swabs, but over the past month we have seen sales of our DX-SensorSwipes skyrocket, so the problems of sensor dust and lubricant is NOT peculiar to the latest Nikon FX sensors.


 Nikonfan99's gear list:Nikonfan99's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
1w12q312qw1 Contributing Member • Posts: 732
Re: A message from Nicholas at copper hill images

Thanks for posting that Nikonfan. As Nicholas said, these pros are not going to promote an inferior product, and if it's good enough for Moose Peterson and Scott Kelby, it's good enough for me. I've been very happy with their kit for about 2 years on my D700. I do have some off days now and then, but then my brain kicks in and I get it down to a speck or two. YMMV.

And in the beginning you just have to get the hang of things, then you kind of see the light and know what to do.


OP MOD TOF guy Forum Pro • Posts: 13,823
Re: A message from Nicholas at copper hill images

Thank you for passing the info along.

A user forgets to check the battery status. The battery dies during the cleaning because the user ignores the camera's warning. Should the repair be at Nikon's expense ? Of course not.

A user sees a sticky piece of dust on the sensor.  He uses a sharp tool to remove it against all common sense. Should Nikon be responsible for fixing the scratches on the sensor. No.

For everybody else with 2 cents of logic and dexterity cleaning a sensor is safe. It is nonetheless understandable that Nikon warns against the risk of damaging the sensor and recommends that the cleaning be performed by a pro.

-- hide signature --

Thierry - posted as regular forum member

 TOF guy's gear list:TOF guy's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM +5 more
Nikonfan99 Senior Member • Posts: 1,411
Re: A message from Nicholas at copper hill images

You are welcome. I agree I have off days too when I use more quickstrips.

The good thing is that nicholas sells the 100 quikstrip packs at a fair price compared to what a box of swabs cost made by other brands.

 Nikonfan99's gear list:Nikonfan99's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
Nikonfan99 Senior Member • Posts: 1,411
Re: A message from Nicholas at copper hill images

No problem. I sent him the email because I did not want to speak for him.

I have gotten a lot of help from Nicholas. He always went out of his way to give me great advice and responds to emails quickly. I would rather give my money to a person that takes the time to write me an email with detailed answers and direction instead of a corporate call center rep that is faceless.

I absolutely agree with you about risk. The moment you take the camera out of the bag it is exposed to risk. You can drop a lens, drop your camera, have a strap fail, have a person spill a drink on your equipment, have a lens mount bend because of a heavy lens that is not supported correctly, scratch a lens when cleaning it and the list goes on and on. Common sense and skill level always come into play. You are responsible for following the directions and using the right tools. I use a 7x sensor loupe and scrutinize the sensor before touching it. I take proper time to blow off the sensor before using a swab. I inspect the sensor before making a pass. I never reuse a swab or make multiple passes with the same swab. Basically I take proper care and use common sense. I clean my own sensor because I know that a tech at nikon is not going to invest the time I do to get it the way that I want it and also it is not his gear. How many photos have we seen after a sensor was supposedly cleaned by Nikon? Hint they don’t always come back clean. Every day that my camera is out of service is a possible day of lost revenue so down time is not an option for me. I have the confidence at this point that I can deal with a last minute cleaning myself and not have to pay $45 and wait a week or more.

 Nikonfan99's gear list:Nikonfan99's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
clarnibass Senior Member • Posts: 1,986
Re: Ding ding ding! A winner!

MarkJH wrote:

Where it's reasonably possible, I want fact, not anecdote, advertisement, or speculation. Facts are powerful!

If I decide to act on speculation in fact's absence (which I realize we all must at some point), I want to be honest about it--with myself and with others. People ought to--have a right to--know what kinds of risks and unknowns they're engaging.

Yes, exactly. I like your scientific approach to this. I repair musical instruments and it's amazing how many myths and honestly BS there is in the mind of most musicians (I'm also a musician...). They really like to believe in many things. I use the same type of approach to repairing instruments that you show here. Technical and factual as possible.

However, you know where some of the myths come from...? Other repairers, music teachers and sometimes from the instrument companies themselves! I'm not saying Nikon is doing this too, but it's possible (if not likely) that they say "under no circumstance" just to protect themsevles from when someone does screw up.

I cleaned my camera's sensor. But like you say, it's good to know what exactly you know and what you don't know, when doing this. Know what risk you are taking and whether you are willing to take it. What possible problem you could have and whether you can or can't deal with that problem. There is a fraction of a second where all this happens every time I'm doing something to repair an instrument. Even real repairs necessary, which are the best way to do it, are not risk free.

But what I found, and I really hope it's not rude to say it, is that most people don't think like that. That, for example, is why there are some pretty lousy instrument repairers. A lot of people consider this almost obssesive approach to be a waste of time and very boring. They prefer to spend their lives not worrying about it most of the time. This is fine. The only problem is that many are not aware of it, so they will jump to recommend something and not even realize they don't really know.

So... I clean my sensor. But I wouldn't necessarily recommend anyone do it, regardless of how many people claim it's simple and just fine. OTOH, I wouldn't necessarily go with whatever Nikon (or any company) says. Consider that Nikon has a video of showing to clean a sensor yourself!

I agree with you that recommending to clean the sensor in a nonchalant way is not great. Of course it's better to know what you don't know and consider the risks...

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads