Nikon Z50 doesn’t have a built in sensor cleaner.

[Mako2011]

It's a common practice to see if it's time to clean the sensor. I was suggesting you have a "look" and see how dirty it actualy is at the moment and let us know... as I'm suggesting the self cleaning won't help

It's night time here in the UK, has been for several hours. I may do a check tomorrow sometime.

Any blank wall or surface shot at f22 will work. Doesn't require daytime

I don't know whether I have any examples of "before and after"

Don't need one...just grab the camera and take a quick shot at f22 to see. I only do it before after an important shoot so the camera is ready for the next....as it always shows the need to clean

Yes I know - so do I.

Any blank surface

I don't "often" wet clean any digital sensor. Probably only 2 or 3 times a year on average. My D850 hasn't had a wet clean for at least a good month.

Then perhaps the ultra sonic isn't working all that great if that many cleanings are still needed. It really is why Nikon is looking to phase that feature out as it doesn't really cut down on number of wet cleans most need.

That's the frequency I usually need with other DSLRs. Since I got the D850 a few months ago it has only had 1 wet clean and that was over a month ago. Time will tell how it goes on.

Will be interesting to see how much dust has or has not accumulated in that short a time

Good Luck with it. A fine camera

 

[NCB]

NCB wrote: With Z50 it would add more to the cost.

Even the US$450 (with lens) Canon M100 has built-in sensor cleaning.

But does it work?

 

[olyflyer]

I am not trying to knock the camera as I am still considering it but quite disappointed by this ridiculous omission on a camera of this level supposedly equal to the 7000 series. I’ve been wanting to go mirrorless for awhile and need a very light camera because of weakening health. I’ve been shooting only Nikon for 30 years and want to stay with them for many reasons but am hesitant with this camera because of this omission. I’ve never shot mirrorless before but when the sensor is exposed all the time unlike SLR I tend to think a sensor cleaner is important.

They are starting to phase out the ultras sonic cleaner as it seems they are finding out the feature really doesn't work that well and never has. I've had the feature on many a camera...and wet cleaning is still required so I don't mind the absence of it going forward.

If you currently have a DSLR with the feature...take a shot at f22 of a blues sky and post it here. You'll find lots of dust I bet

Except the inbuilt ultra-sonic system seems to be working quite well with my D850 for some reason. Magic. Several times I have had dust "bunnies", tried the self-clean before doing anything more drastic and it has often worked. One more reason I am very pleased with my D850. Doesn't always shift everything so then I usually will resort to a wet clean with Eclipse fluid etc - or use my "Arctic Butterfly" fitted with the super brush.

The D850 is the only one of Nikon's DSLR's that I have owned that I can say that about. With all the rest (D200, D7000, D7100, D800, D810 and even the D500) it didn't really seem to achieve any useful cleaning at all - I always had to wet clean those.

Frank

It worked well also in my D300s and D800. It definitely works in the Z7 but not as well as I wanted. I wouldn't buy a camera without it. It is a show stopper.

 

[FrankG]

It's a common practice to see if it's time to clean the sensor. I was suggesting you have a "look" and see how dirty it actualy is at the moment and let us know... as I'm suggesting the self cleaning won't help

It's night time here in the UK, has been for several hours. I may do a check tomorrow sometime.

Any blank wall or surface shot at f22 will work. Doesn't require daytime

I don't know whether I have any examples of "before and after"

Don't need one...just grab the camera and take a quick shot at f22 to see. I only do it before after an important shoot so the camera is ready for the next....as it always shows the need to clean

Yes I know - so do I.

Any blank surface

I don't "often" wet clean any digital sensor. Probably only 2 or 3 times a year on average. My D850 hasn't had a wet clean for at least a good month.

Then perhaps the ultra sonic isn't working all that great if that many cleanings are still needed. It really is why Nikon is looking to phase that feature out as it doesn't really cut down on number of wet cleans most need.

That's the frequency I usually need with other DSLRs. Since I got the D850 a few months ago it has only had 1 wet clean and that was over a month ago. Time will tell how it goes on.

Will be interesting to see how much dust has or has not accumulated in that short a time

OK, this morning despite limited time, I managed to do a quick check photo.

Mt procedure: grab the D850 (still with 300PF + 1.7 converter attached), set to manual focus, set to ISO100 (auto ISO OFF), set to F25, take 1 shot against sky (very overcast this morning). Upload NEF file to computer, processed out via DXO Photolab as a jpeg.

Here's the result:


Sample D850 dust bunny check photo at F25

There is 1 obvious contaminant at the most very extreme top-right corner of the image. A small hair that has been there since before the last wet clean which failed to remove it. I will get round to getting rid of that but it doesn't bother me much as it is easily cloned out and often will get cropped out.

Apart from that 1 item - see if you can spot any dust bunnies. I can't say I have noticed any.

Frank

 

[Mako2011]

OK, this morning despite limited time, I managed to do a quick check photo.

Mt procedure: grab the D850 (still with 300PF + 1.7 converter attached), set to manual focus, set to ISO100 (auto ISO OFF), set to F25, take 1 shot against sky (very overcast this morning). Upload NEF file to computer, processed out via DXO Photolab as a jpeg.

Here's the result:


Sample D850 dust bunny check photo at F25

There is 1 obvious contaminant at the most very extreme top-right corner of the image.

That one is pretty big. If the cleaning feature doesn't remove it...another indication the feature may be best to leave off follow on models as it should work best with the big stuff.

Otherwise good job with your last wet clean. Should be good for a bit.

--
My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

 

[FrankG]

OK, this morning despite limited time, I managed to do a quick check photo.

Mt procedure: grab the D850 (still with 300PF + 1.7 converter attached), set to manual focus, set to ISO100 (auto ISO OFF), set to F25, take 1 shot against sky (very overcast this morning). Upload NEF file to computer, processed out via DXO Photolab as a jpeg.

Here's the result:


Sample D850 dust bunny check photo at F25

There is 1 obvious contaminant at the most very extreme top-right corner of the image.

That one is pretty big. If the cleaning feature doesn't remove it...another indication the feature may be best to leave off follow on models as it should work best with the big stuff.

Otherwise good job with your last wet clean. Should be good for a bit.

The wet clean of over a month ago failed to remove it so it is probably glued on. Which means that the ultra-sonic self-clean would have no chance. I will try having a go at it with my super brush on the arctic butterfly, failing that I might have to try a different type of cleaning kit or even a professional clean.

However what you are missing is that although the sensor appears generally clean right now it has picked up loads of dust spots at times since the last wet clean and every time the self-clean has removed them again. That's why it's still clean!

Frank

 

[Mako2011]

The wet clean of over a month ago failed to remove it so it is probably glued on. Which means that the ultra-sonic self-clean would have no chance.

That shouldn't be the case as the self clean operates at every on/off cycle so should have removed it (if it worked as published) before it had a chance to adhere

I will try having a go at it with my super brush on the arctic butterfly, failing that I might have to try a different type of cleaning kit or even a professional clean.

For things like that.... knowing it is at the bottom right as you look at the sensor from the front of the camera...I would retry a wet clean. If that doesn't remove it (may take a few tries with eclipse) an arctic butterfly won't as the brush puts way less pressure on the sensor than wet clean pad.

 

[olyflyer]

OK, this morning despite limited time, I managed to do a quick check photo.

Mt procedure: grab the D850 (still with 300PF + 1.7 converter attached), set to manual focus, set to ISO100 (auto ISO OFF), set to F25, take 1 shot against sky (very overcast this morning). Upload NEF file to computer, processed out via DXO Photolab as a jpeg.

Here's the result:


Sample D850 dust bunny check photo at F25

There is 1 obvious contaminant at the most very extreme top-right corner of the image.

That one is pretty big. If the cleaning feature doesn't remove it...another indication the feature may be best to leave off follow on models as it should work best with the big stuff.

Otherwise good job with your last wet clean. Should be good for a bit.

To expect a cleaning system to clean everything is a bit asking too much. My windshield also needs some extra work now and then, even if I wet clean it often and there nothing wrong with my wipers. It wouldn't make me claim that wipers are useless and obsolete.

 

[Mako2011]

OK, this morning despite limited time, I managed to do a quick check photo.

Mt procedure: grab the D850 (still with 300PF + 1.7 converter attached), set to manual focus, set to ISO100 (auto ISO OFF), set to F25, take 1 shot against sky (very overcast this morning). Upload NEF file to computer, processed out via DXO Photolab as a jpeg.

Here's the result:


Sample D850 dust bunny check photo at F25

There is 1 obvious contaminant at the most very extreme top-right corner of the image.

That one is pretty big. If the cleaning feature doesn't remove it...another indication the feature may be best to leave off follow on models as it should work best with the big stuff.

Otherwise good job with your last wet clean. Should be good for a bit.

To expect a cleaning system to clean everything is a bit asking too much

In this case though...the feature really does work well well below the level the advertising suggests...and why it's being phased out. That's a good thing. Less cost and perhaps better innovation going forward.



--
My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

 

[BGD300V1]

that entry level users never change lenses anyway. ;-):-D

 

[BGD300V1]

Except the inbuilt ultra-sonic system seems to be working quite well with my D850 for some reason.

Show a recent f22 of the sky. You might be surprised

This one is supersonic

--
My photo blog: http://birdsnbugs.com
RF Stock Portfolio - http://www.dreamstime.com/resp129611

 

[Kubicide]

Hi everyone. It’s my first post here and I just wanted to inform any who are ordering the Z50 that it is lacking a sensor cleaner. I’m only posting this as some may have ordered or are going to order the camera based on reading the specs on the Nikon USA or Canada website shortly after the announcement was made.

For several days from the announcement date the Nikon website had the specs wrong and it listed it with a sensor cleaner. I was ready to order it myself but then I downloaded the brochure and it didn’t list a sensor cleaner. So this past Thursday I called Nikon Canada and emailed Nikon USA about this. The Canada rep said only one person there had seen the camera and he believed it didn’t have the sensor cleaner so the specs might be off. The USA reps never responded.

Well next day both websites changed the specs showing that there is no sensor cleaner. I took screenshots of the changes on the website if anyone cares to see.

I am not trying to knock the camera as I am still considering it but quite disappointed by this ridiculous omission on a camera of this level supposedly equal to the 7000 series. I’ve been wanting to go mirrorless for awhile and need a very light camera because of weakening health. I’ve been shooting only Nikon for 30 years and want to stay with them for many reasons but am hesitant with this camera because of this omission. I’ve never shot mirrorless before but when the sensor is exposed all the time unlike SLR I tend to think a sensor cleaner is important.

I was surprised at the discrepancy on their website and got to the bottom of it but haven’t really seen this talked about too much so I just thought I’d put the information out there so whoever is buying this camera can make an accurately informed choice.

That’s disappointing. The ultrasonic cleaning works well and that’s why many manufacturers include this feature. If it didn’t work it wouldn’t be offered as it would certainly help reduce costs.

 

[Kubicide]

I am not trying to knock the camera as I am still considering it but quite disappointed by this ridiculous omission on a camera of this level supposedly equal to the 7000 series. I’ve been wanting to go mirrorless for awhile and need a very light camera because of weakening health. I’ve been shooting only Nikon for 30 years and want to stay with them for many reasons but am hesitant with this camera because of this omission. I’ve never shot mirrorless before but when the sensor is exposed all the time unlike SLR I tend to think a sensor cleaner is important.

They are starting to phase out the ultras sonic cleaner as it seems they are finding out the feature really doesn't work that well and never has. I've had the feature on many a camera...and wet cleaning is still required so I don't mind the absence of it going forward.

If you currently have a DSLR with the feature...take a shot at f22 of a blues sky and post it here. You'll find lots of dust I bet

Can you point to any evidence of a phase out for ultrasonic cleaning? This would be helpful for us as it hasn’t been reported before.

 

[Mako2011]

I am not trying to knock the camera as I am still considering it but quite disappointed by this ridiculous omission on a camera of this level supposedly equal to the 7000 series. I’ve been wanting to go mirrorless for awhile and need a very light camera because of weakening health. I’ve been shooting only Nikon for 30 years and want to stay with them for many reasons but am hesitant with this camera because of this omission. I’ve never shot mirrorless before but when the sensor is exposed all the time unlike SLR I tend to think a sensor cleaner is important.

They are starting to phase out the ultras sonic cleaner as it seems they are finding out the feature really doesn't work that well and never has. I've had the feature on many a camera...and wet cleaning is still required so I don't mind the absence of it going forward.

If you currently have a DSLR with the feature...take a shot at f22 of a blues sky and post it here. You'll find lots of dust I bet

Can you point to any evidence of a phase out for ultrasonic cleaning? This would be helpful for us as it hasn’t been reported before.

I spoke with Nikon USA reps at NAB this year about IBIS and the subject came up. They also pointed out it's not very effective overall (especially as sensor resolution increases) so phasing it out and putting more emphasis on IBIS made more sense for them. And as you see...seems to no longer be part of the latest model. They don't speak for Nikon Japan but do keep in "touch"

Back when 12mp was the norm...it seemed to be a little more practical. Now that 24mp+ is the norm...what it fails to get is more obvious. Money better spent elsewhere? From my own experience...number of wet cleans required with vs without the feature is the same

 

[Guy Dagar]

I was trying to avoid weighing in on the Z50, but I just can't help it. Why anyone would buy this ridiculous attempt at a consumer grade/beginner mirrorless Nikon is a mystery to me. If one cannot afford the Z6, buy a refurbished D750 for $1096 at B&H or Adorama, or a good used D610 or D800 or anything but a Z50. I know a lot of people love the APS-C format but it never compares to full-frame and there are so many limitations with the Z50 that it is nothing more than a gimmicky way for Nikon to sell more cameras riding on the growing mirrorless wave. If you're "enthusiastic" about photography don't waste your time and money on a Z50. Save your dough for a Z6 or Z7.

 

[BGD300V1]

I was trying to avoid weighing in on the Z50, but I just can't help it. Why anyone would buy this ridiculous attempt at a consumer grade/beginner mirrorless Nikon is a mystery to me. If one cannot afford the Z6, buy a refurbished D750 for $1096 at B&H or Adorama, or a good used D610 or D800 or anything but a Z50. I know a lot of people love the APS-C format but it never compares to full-frame and there are so many limitations with the Z50 that it is nothing more than a gimmicky way for Nikon to sell more cameras riding on the growing mirrorless wave. If you're "enthusiastic" about photography don't waste your time and money on a Z50. Save your dough for a Z6 or Z7.

I suspect it will be bought by someone (perhaps a beginner) who wants a consumer grade camera.

If they sell a lot of them there may one day be a D7.

 

[Guy Dagar]

I was trying to avoid weighing in on the Z50, but I just can't help it. Why anyone would buy this ridiculous attempt at a consumer grade/beginner mirrorless Nikon is a mystery to me. If one cannot afford the Z6, buy a refurbished D750 for $1096 at B&H or Adorama, or a good used D610 or D800 or anything but a Z50. I know a lot of people love the APS-C format but it never compares to full-frame and there are so many limitations with the Z50 that it is nothing more than a gimmicky way for Nikon to sell more cameras riding on the growing mirrorless wave. If you're "enthusiastic" about photography don't waste your time and money on a Z50. Save your dough for a Z6 or Z7.

I suspect it will be bought by someone (perhaps a beginner) who wants a consumer grade camera.

If they sell a lot of them there may one day be a D7.

Yeah, I suppose you're right. Someone completely new to photography probably shouldn't invest too much to begin with. I just know from my own experience that I should have bought a Canon 5D right off the bat instead of an APS-C body 15 years ago—I have a thousand images that would have been much better on the full-frame body.

 

[Kubicide]

I am not trying to knock the camera as I am still considering it but quite disappointed by this ridiculous omission on a camera of this level supposedly equal to the 7000 series. I’ve been wanting to go mirrorless for awhile and need a very light camera because of weakening health. I’ve been shooting only Nikon for 30 years and want to stay with them for many reasons but am hesitant with this camera because of this omission. I’ve never shot mirrorless before but when the sensor is exposed all the time unlike SLR I tend to think a sensor cleaner is important.

They are starting to phase out the ultras sonic cleaner as it seems they are finding out the feature really doesn't work that well and never has. I've had the feature on many a camera...and wet cleaning is still required so I don't mind the absence of it going forward.

If you currently have a DSLR with the feature...take a shot at f22 of a blues sky and post it here. You'll find lots of dust I bet

Can you point to any evidence of a phase out for ultrasonic cleaning? This would be helpful for us as it hasn’t been reported before.

I spoke with Nikon USA reps at NAB this year about IBIS and the subject came up. They also pointed out it's not very effective overall (especially as sensor resolution increases) so phasing it out and putting more emphasis on IBIS made more sense for them. And as you see...seems to no longer be part of the latest model. They don't speak for Nikon Japan but do keep in "touch"

Back when 12mp was the norm...it seemed to be a little more practical. Now that 24mp+ is the norm...what it fails to get is more obvious. Money better spent elsewhere? From my own experience...number of wet cleans required with vs without the feature is the same

Interesting but it also sounds more like marketing talk prepping the media for the removal of a feature rather than a real technical statement.

The facts are simply that it works. Many - if not all or most - camera manufacturers added the ultrasonic dust cleaning feature to their cameras over the past, what, 10 or 12 years. And they did that because it had value. If it didn't work, and had no value, it would have been dropped by many.

 

[Mako2011]

The facts are simply that it works.

In a very limited way and really not all that well. You still need to wet clean. I haven't really seen a noticeable practical dif with the feature on vs off.

Many - if not all or most - camera manufacturers added the ultrasonic dust cleaning feature to their cameras over the past, what, 10 or 12 years.

Maybe it was just more a marketing feature. The "New Coke" of camera features. Seems IBIS is far more practical

And they did that because it had value.

People bought into it so it had value...but for whom really

If it didn't work, and had no value, it would have been dropped by many.

Didn't have to work well...for folks to buy in? Now the feature may be on the out? Even less practical with IBIS sensors?

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

Many find sensor cleaning on the Z 6 & 7 a long way from being a 10 out of 10 feature :-(

This aside a recently made blower brush and, depending on how often you change lenses, a quick very easy to do sensor clean with a swab takes very little time.