Harmful effects of direct sunlight on MLC sensors

[Jack Pangolin]

Hi everyone !

I can't seem to find fully enlightening information about how harmful can the effects of sun framing be on modern mirrorless camera sensors.

I have used DSLR for years and recently moved to MLC 8 months ago (R5)

I'm about to word what is my understanding of that question and then share a personal project I'm willing to undertake.
I do not pretend to own the truth on this but would like to point out some lack I regularly find in topic-related articles.

Many thanks in advance for your attention and answers !

As a starting place, some basic reminder: Unlike DSLR cameras, an MLC's sensor is permanently exposed to the lens-driven light. As a result the sensor may be exposed during extended periods of time to intense direct sunlight by merely framing the sun through the EVF.
To this extent, the shots themselves are now of minor matter, but long exposure ones.

In an attempt to explore the question,
1/ I suggest that a sensor may start burning whenever it reaches a global temperature during a certain amount of time.
2/ I suggest that a sensor may start burning "locally" whenever a given area within its surface reaches a certain temperature / energy.

I'll enter more closely those two leads, provided the following use case: the sun is being framed through the EVF of an ML camera, the camera is being hand-held (no tripod used) and short exposure shots are being taken.

1/ The global temperature of the sensor mainly depends on the lens-driven light, which is a function of its full aperture, the amount of time spent, and the focal length which will grow or shrink the appearing sun disk and therefore increase or decrease the overall sunlight hitting the sensor.

2/ The "local" energy issue depends on the lens's full aperture as well, but not on the focal length any longer. Not at first glance at least. What matters here is the sun's local intensity, its light concentration, not the total captured light. Indeed, the sun is as much intense and concentrated should it be hitting a 1mm² or a 20mm² area of the sensor.
What particularly matters here is the amount of time the sun image will be hitting the same area of the sensor. To this extent, the focal length does matter afterall, as it will make the sun "slide" by the photographer's moves more or less on the same areas depending on the size of its appearing disk.

This very issue often seems overlooked by many topic-related articles which mainly focus on the global temperature issue.

Now,
LensRentals had released an interesting article about camera gear destroyed during a solar eclipse.
However this article does not approach the technical aspects of the damaging process.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/09/rental-camera-gear-destroyed-by-the-solar-eclipse-of-2017/

Interestingly, irises can be harmed, whatever focal length used. But what strikes me most are the damages seen on shutters and sensors, which are razor sharp, concentrated like imperial laser shots. This makes me suggest that it's the straight sun image hitting the shutter or the sensor that harmed the area, not the overall captured light.
The shutter or the sensor just cannot seem to sustain the local sun intensity passed a given amount of time.
In other words, the "local" energy issue seems to be a concerning matter whatever focal length used.

Therefore, even a wide angle lens, if headed to the sun a sufficient amount of time may damage the sensor.

Does this understanding of the issue sound relevant to you ?
If so, what time a sensor can sustain the direct sunlight hitting approximatively the same area before starting to burn locally ? Is that a matter of seconds ?
I doubt anyone can answer to this, but camera makers' R&D department personal. Yet feel free to share your thoughts !

Now, I'll share a photo work I'm about to undertake under sun-related stressful conditions.
I'm willing to take pictures of a person in plain sunlight (not during sunset), with the sun being framed in the back.
The exposure settings will be about as following: F/14, 1/640th, iso 100, but this is of minor matter regarding the raised issue.

I'll work in manual exposure, and maybe in manual focus, in order to minimize the time spent facing the sun for every shot I'll take. Only the subject's moves and the picture framing will make me spend some time facing the sun.
Also, I'm decided to use the depth of field preview button while framing in order to split the sun intensity between the iris and the sensor.

My last questions are then:
Has any one of you friends ever tried to frame the sun on the back of photographs on a hand-held MLC for extended periods of time ? (whatever lens used)
Has any of you ever tried to frame the sun on an MLC set on a tripod using a wide angle lens ? (say 28mm or less) For instance for landscape shots.
How did all this eventually turn out ?

I hope I have made my approach sound clear enough for you to understand (as english is not my native language) and thank you all for your kind help and enlightenment.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

I've shot into the sun with the Canon R5 many times. However my rule is, I only point the camera into the sun if I can look at the sun myself. That is, when the sun is behind the clouds or near sunset/sunrise.

On a few occasions I had the sensor exposed to the naked sun accidentally, but I tried to block the sun asap, one way or another. So far, the sensor seems to be fine. The focal lengths used (when shooting into the sun) range from 16 to about 100mm.

 

[Gato Amarillo]

I have done a number of photos with the sun in the frame over the years, using various Panasonic mirrorless cameras. No sign of damage so far.

My thinking, based on this experience and a few informal experiments with lenses, that one would have to keep the sun focused on a specific spot for several seconds to see any real damage. Something that might happen with a tripod set up to shoot and eclipse but is not likely to happen in hand-held general photography.

A person can easily do some experimentation just by taking a lens (without a camera) and focusing the sun on something like a sheet of paper, a black card, or even one's own skin. You can do damage, even start a fire, but it takes a while.

That said, I do take reasonable precautions, such as not leaving the camera lying around with the lens toward the sun.

Gato

 

[WongRQ]

Hi everyone !

I can't seem to find fully enlightening information about how harmful can the effects of sun framing be on modern mirrorless camera sensors.

I have used DSLR for years and recently moved to MLC 8 months ago (R5)

I'm about to word what is my understanding of that question and then share a personal project I'm willing to undertake.
I do not pretend to own the truth on this but would like to point out some lack I regularly find in topic-related articles.

Many thanks in advance for your attention and answers !

As a starting place, some basic reminder: Unlike DSLR cameras, an MLC's sensor is permanently exposed to the lens-driven light. As a result the sensor may be exposed during extended periods of time to intense direct sunlight by merely framing the sun through the EVF.
To this extent, the shots themselves are now of minor matter, but long exposure ones.

In an attempt to explore the question,
1/ I suggest that a sensor may start burning whenever it reaches a global temperature during a certain amount of time.
2/ I suggest that a sensor may start burning "locally" whenever a given area within its surface reaches a certain temperature / energy.

I'll enter more closely those two leads, provided the following use case: the sun is being framed through the EVF of an ML camera, the camera is being hand-held (no tripod used) and short exposure shots are being taken.

1/ The global temperature of the sensor mainly depends on the lens-driven light, which is a function of its full aperture, the amount of time spent, and the focal length which will grow or shrink the appearing sun disk and therefore increase or decrease the overall sunlight hitting the sensor.

2/ The "local" energy issue depends on the lens's full aperture as well, but not on the focal length any longer. Not at first glance at least. What matters here is the sun's local intensity, its light concentration, not the total captured light. Indeed, the sun is as much intense and concentrated should it be hitting a 1mm² or a 20mm² area of the sensor.
What particularly matters here is the amount of time the sun image will be hitting the same area of the sensor. To this extent, the focal length does matter afterall, as it will make the sun "slide" by the photographer's moves more or less on the same areas depending on the size of its appearing disk.

This very issue often seems overlooked by many topic-related articles which mainly focus on the global temperature issue.

Now,
LensRentals had released an interesting article about camera gear destroyed during a solar eclipse.
However this article does not approach the technical aspects of the damaging process.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/09/rental-camera-gear-destroyed-by-the-solar-eclipse-of-2017/

Interestingly, irises can be harmed, whatever focal length used. But what strikes me most are the damages seen on shutters and sensors, which are razor sharp, concentrated like imperial laser shots. This makes me suggest that it's the straight sun image hitting the shutter or the sensor that harmed the area, not the overall captured light.
The shutter or the sensor just cannot seem to sustain the local sun intensity passed a given amount of time.
In other words, the "local" energy issue seems to be a concerning matter whatever focal length used.

Therefore, even a wide angle lens, if headed to the sun a sufficient amount of time may damage the sensor.

Does this understanding of the issue sound relevant to you ?
If so, what time a sensor can sustain the direct sunlight hitting approximatively the same area before starting to burn locally ? Is that a matter of seconds ?
I doubt anyone can answer to this, but camera makers' R&D department personal. Yet feel free to share your thoughts !

Now, I'll share a photo work I'm about to undertake under sun-related stressful conditions.
I'm willing to take pictures of a person in plain sunlight (not during sunset), with the sun being framed in the back.
The exposure settings will be about as following: F/14, 1/640th, iso 100, but this is of minor matter regarding the raised issue.

I'll work in manual exposure, and maybe in manual focus, in order to minimize the time spent facing the sun for every shot I'll take. Only the subject's moves and the picture framing will make me spend some time facing the sun.
Also, I'm decided to use the depth of field preview button while framing in order to split the sun intensity between the iris and the sensor.

My last questions are then:
Has any one of you friends ever tried to frame the sun on the back of photographs on a hand-held MLC for extended periods of time ? (whatever lens used)
Has any of you ever tried to frame the sun on an MLC set on a tripod using a wide angle lens ? (say 28mm or less) For instance for landscape shots.
How did all this eventually turn out ?

I hope I have made my approach sound clear enough for you to understand (as english is not my native language) and thank you all for your kind help and enlightenment.

To me, the possibility and degree damage (if at all) seems to be affected by a few factors:
- Sunlight brightness and intensity
- Focal length
- Iris opening.

Sun’s brightness

A sun during noon time is definitely going to be a lot brighter than evening time. Therefore this can be a factor. In the case of a solar eclipse, if it’s happening during noon time, you run a greater risk rather than shooting the directly at the sun at evening time.

Focal length

I think that the focal length can be a contributing factor. This is because with a longer focal length, the angle of view is smaller and the magnification is a lot higher. Hence, focusing the sunlight at a much smaller area and with higher magnification the intensity is a lot higher

Opening of the iris of the lens

The opening or the iris of the lens can also be a factor with a bigger opening resulting in an increased amount of sunlight the sensor is exposed to

Conclusion

If you’re talking about taking a wide angle lens and taking a sunset shot with sun in the frame, shouldn’t be an issue. If you’re using a 600mm f/4 with a 2X Teleconverter and you’re taking a picture of a solar eclipse during noon without any sort of protection, then that’s when there’s a real risk.

--
Instagram: @wongrqphotography

 

[alcelc]

This should have been discussed a lot periodically on this forum

You might know it already, that under modern day AF, the lenses would keep wide open and will only stop down to the set f/stop on shooting. You put in the f/14 condition might mean little during your operation before taking the shot...

In reality, sensor of MILC is designed to work for a much longer time than its sibling of dslr, says metering, AF and will feed data continously to the JPG engine to generate Live View image etc... Therefore generally (we could expect) MILC sensor should be more tolerant to heat and can operate under much higher temperature for a longer period of time. When a lot of reports on burning shutter curtain, damage sensor of dslrs, the report for similar damages to MILC is relatively less. This could be a result of dslr is still a dominant tool, or might be the sensor of MILC is optimized for the working environment...

During my last 11 years shooting experience with MILC, to have the sun included in the frame was very common. Never have any problem so far. I shoot with 7mm (eq to 14mm of FF) to 200mm (eq to 400mm of FF) a lot.

BTW, why we would specially shoot at the sun other than sun rise or sunset without protection, for a pure no detail white mass? If just has the sun included in the frame and not focusing on it, it should be safe (at least truth to the Panasonic cameras I am using).

--
Albert
** Please forgive my typo error.
** Please feel free to download the original image I posted here and edit it as you like **

 

[BBbuilder467]

My m4/3 will automatically close down the aperture when pointed directly at the sun when powered up. When using a tripod in the hot, bright sun, I keep it covered between shots. Some lenses are wide open when powered down.

I know someone who left his micro 4/3 on a table out in the hot sun and it ruined the sensor.

I think that's what happened during the solar eclipse. After framing, they let the camera sit there powered down with the sensor exposed while they waited.

 

[tbcass]

Brief exposure is no problem but prolonged exposure and kiss it goodbye.

Can you Point a Mirrorless Camera at the Sun? - Photodoto

 

[sybersitizen]

... what time a sensor can sustain the direct sunlight hitting approximatively the same area before starting to burn locally ? Is that a matter of seconds ?

Depends on the lens. A lens with an entrance pupil of two or three inches concentrates a lot of radiation into a very small area and can ignite flammable material almost instantly.

Has any one of you friends ever tried to frame the sun on the back of photographs on a hand-held MLC for extended periods of time ? (whatever lens used)

Not for 'extended periods of time'.

Has any of you ever tried to frame the sun on an MLC set on a tripod using a wide angle lens ? (say 28mm or less) For instance for landscape shots.

Yes.

How did all this eventually turn out ?

It's been fine for me.

It would seem that a 24mm f/2.8 lens produces as much radiation intensity per unit area as a 200mm f/2.8 lens, so it could just as easily damage a sensor, though only in a smaller area ... but I can't ignite a dry leaf with my 24mm while that's easy to do with my 200mm. I wonder if it has something to do with the retrofocus design of the 24mm.

Anyway, I assume the reason why sensor damage from the sun is most widely reported with long lenses is that the much larger light gathering area is a key factor. They also produce a lot more general heat buildup within the camera that can't be as easily dissipated.

 

[Gato Amarillo]

Very informal, but I grabbed an old lens out of the closet, an old 50mm f2, took it out on the front porch, and tried a couple of things.

First I tried to focus the sun on the back of my hand. It was painful within a second or two. In fact, I could not hold it long enough to get really sharp focus -- not longer than about three seconds.

Then I tried a piece of black duct tape. It took no more than three or four seconds to melt a hole through the tape. And that was with the lens held in my somewhat shaky hand.

So it took a lot less time to generate heat, even without critical focus, than I expected.

I had heard stories from the old days about rangefinder cameras and the sun burning through the fabric shutter. Leica owners knew to be careful. I don't know just how long it would take to damage a digital sensor, but I will be cautious in the future.

Be careful out there.

Gato

 

[57even]

As a rule, do not shoot directly into the sun unless it's very low on the horizon and you can look at it with the naked eye.

 

[Jack Pangolin]

Thank you all for your contributions !

I've been kept quite busy these days and shall take the time to read each answer before replying.

Quickly stated, I carried out a little experimentation and have learned something valuable about the manual exposure mode of the R5.

Depending on the exposure settings, the iris is bound to open or close accordingly, which I hadn't noticed until now.

Few days ago, I took some pictures of the sunset (135mm, F/10, 1/800th) and found out that the iris was kept pretty tight during framing.

increasing exposure speed made it even tighter (which makes sense to reflect the exposure results on the EVF, I guess).

I therefore was pretty confident that framing the sunset wouldn't harm the sensor in any way, which is a good omen for the future. However, the lens's iris is now a concern...

See you soon and many thanks once more !

 

[alcelc]

Thank you all for your contributions !

I've been kept quite busy these days and shall take the time to read each answer before replying.

Quickly stated, I carried out a little experimentation and have learned something valuable about the manual exposure mode of the R5.

Depending on the exposure settings, the iris is bound to open or close accordingly, which I hadn't noticed until now.

Few days ago, I took some pictures of the sunset (135mm, F/10, 1/800th) and found out that the iris was kept pretty tight during framing.

increasing exposure speed made it even tighter (which makes sense to reflect the exposure results on the EVF, I guess).

I therefore was pretty confident that framing the sunset wouldn't harm the sensor in any way, which is a good omen for the future. However, the lens's iris is now a concern...

See you soon and many thanks once more !

My brand (Panasonic M43) does wide open on framing and only stops down aperture blade on actual capturing. The shutter also keeps wide open except for the moment of capturing.

However, I never worry about it because over my last 11 years experience with the system, sun has done nothing to my gear . So if your brand will close down aperture well before capturing, you should feel easier on that.

Just a couple of days ago, taking chance of a clear sky evening, I went to the nearby water front for a 2 hours sunset shooting session. I used an ultra wide angle zoom lens (eq to 14mm ~28mm of FF), a standard zoom lens having eq AoV of 24mm~70mm, a cheap tele having eq AoV of 90mm~300mm and a eq AoV 30mm prime lens.

Right before sunset, the sun actually was still very bright and it was around 31+℃ @1800 (45 minutes before sunset). The following test shot at 0ev metering the exposure value was high as 18ev (Pls see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value ). I could not look at the sun through my transition glasses which had changed to its darkest already:



Just 15 min before the sunset, the exposure value was still high at 16ev:



A thread shared a few shots from that session at: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65427406

Shoot with common sense will do, put those over worrying behind... Happy shooting.

--
Albert
** Please forgive my typo error.
** Please feel free to download the original image I posted here and edit it as you like **

 

[John Crowe]

I photographed my 400mm f2.8 lens last year to sell it. I took many photos of it in direct sunlight. I took quite a few with the sun shining down through the barrel of the lens to show the glass and aperture. For some of the photos I placed the rear cap on the lens. I can't imagine that it was on there for very long while pointed at the sun, so I was horrified that a 1/4" diameter hole had been burnt through the cap!

Ever since then I have been very careful how I rest my camera and lenses. I no longer have a mirrorless, but I still worry about my camera. I am also much more careful about my many sunrise/sunset shots.

 

[tbcass]

I photographed my 400mm f2.8 lens last year to sell it. I took many photos of it in direct sunlight. I took quite a few with the sun shining down through the barrel of the lens to show the glass and aperture. For some of the photos I placed the rear cap on the lens. I can't imagine that it was on there for very long while pointed at the sun, so I was horrified that a 1/4" diameter hole had been burnt through the cap!

It sounds like it would be great for starting fires!! When we were kids we used to do it with a simple magnifying glass

 

[Jack Pangolin]

Back from a quick trip to Mars...
Once again I thank all of you for your help and contribution.

I've learned valuable knowledge about sun framing using a MILC, which I'll try to share here. I'm no expert though, and invite you to proceed with extreme caution if you wish to experiment your way.
Following advices are no guide and come with absolutely no pretension regarding accuracy or safety at all.
Also be aware that I have no experience on any other MILC but my R5.

!! First of all, here's a preliminary warning !!
The R5 handles the MANUAL exposure mode by closing the iris more or less depending on the exposure settings (speed, aperture and ISO) WHILE TARGETTING. That's key information since this leads to splitting the light amount that eventually hits the sensor during framing.
NB: The R5 closes the iris step by step, not continuously
Yet, the iris is this way exposed to sun light, and therefore something to care about.
I absolutely have no idea whether other MILCs behave the same, and cannot help but let you check your own gear before undertaking any experience.
Please be cautious.

I managed to achieve a bunch of satisfying shots with my R5 by following up these rules:

• Always shoot on manual exposure mode, checking that the exposure settings makes the iris close at least a bit while targetting.
• If doable, prefer manual focus over autofocus, in order to skip focusing time. (focus once for all before)
• Always slide a bit to every direction while framing, in order to keep the sun from hitting the same area of the sensor for long periods of time. Remain steady only a fraction of second before shooting.
• Never frame the sun for more than a few seconds, in particular through a telephoto lens (100mm or longer). Wider lenses can sustain the sun a few seconds longer.
• Lower the lens as soon as the shot is taken.
• ND Filters are close to useless since you'll be forced to increase exposure settings which will cause the iris to get wider.

The time of day doesn't matter that much, provided that you lower the exposure settings accordingly.
For instance, at golden hour, during summer, use the approximative settings: F/8 1/400th
When the sun is high, set them to about F/14 1/800th (make sure that the iris does close a step more compared to F/8 1/400th) etc...

My R5 remains up and ready so far.
Please proceed with caution with your own gear.

And thanks to all once again !

PS: Hereafter is one of the shots I made at the end of last summer.
(135mm F/8 1/800th ISO 200)

 

[Tom_V]

I used to do sunset time-lapses with a Fujifilm X-E3 and the 55-200mm with a 10 stop ND filter with the sun in frame for minutes with shutter speeds under 1/50 sec; nothing happened to the sensor.

I'm a smoker, and on a hike I forgot my lighter so I used a lens to light the cigarette, it worked flawlessly.