Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
General Photography questions
Page <<first <prev 9 of 10 next>
Dec 17, 2014 13:28:43   #
gonate Loc: sacramento,calif
 
:D Go ahead shoot Nikon be sorry for ever, your choice.

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 15:29:54   #
TucsonCoyote Loc: Tucson AZ
 
DirtFarmer wrote:
First, black is the absence of visible light and white is a uniform distribution of visible light. It has nothing to do with IR or UV, which we don't see. But for the purposes of this post I'll assume your Nikon lens absorbs only visible and IR and your Canon lens absorbs only UV.

While it is true that a UV photon has more energy than an IR photon (and is therefore "hotter" ), there are a lot more IR photon in sunlight at the earth's surface. UV is fairly strong in space, but the very energetics inherent in the UV photons make them susceptible to absorption in the atmosphere. And I'm not talking about the air around you, but the atmosphere 100 miles up. The air is pretty thin up there, but it's quite effective at blocking most of the solar UV. Even more effective is the ozone layer around 50 miles up.

Here are two illustrations showing the solar spectrum and the transparency of the atmosphere at the surface. They are from the Handbook of Geophysics and the Space Environment, Air Force Geophysics Laboratory, 1985. Note the rapid fall in the intensity of the solar spectrum in the UV (to the left of the visible spectrum) and note further that the graph uses a logarithmic scale. Also, the transparency of the atmosphere is small in the UV while the IR has a number of transparent bands.
First, black is the absence of visible light and w... (show quote)

This explains clearly the problem with rabid Canon owners, they have this High opinion of themselves and all live way up above everybody else ! :roll: 8-)

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 15:47:43   #
mikeg1218 Loc: Port Charlotte Fl.
 
OK, so I'm new to the forum but that doesn't mean I don't know the inane when I see it, nor the not relevant to the person asking a simple question.

Out side of Chernobyl or an owners stupidity does any know of someones lens failing due to any kind of radiation?

An example of stupidity, leaving ones camera for two hours, on the roof of their car, at two PM in August in Florida.

Reply
 
 
Dec 17, 2014 15:58:41   #
JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA
 
mikeg1218 wrote:
OK, so I'm new to the forum but that doesn't mean I don't know the inane when I see it, nor the not relevant to the person asking a simple question.

Out side of Chernobyl or an owners stupidity does any know of someones lens failing due to any kind of radiation?

An example of stupidity, leaving ones camera for two hours, on the roof of their car, at two PM in August in Florida.



I think I would be concerned about the heat rather radiation. If it is now working OK, then it is probably in OK shape. Things that could be affected by the heat:

LCD display
Sensor
plactic parts that could warp

The lens would have possible issues too caused by heat that could affect the rotating parts and lens alignments.

Hope it is OK

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 16:01:14   #
mikeg1218 Loc: Port Charlotte Fl.
 
I'm sorry, I thought what I wrote was pretty clear, but evidently not.

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 16:37:39   #
DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
 
canon Lee wrote:
Oh my, what have i started? I still don't know why canon's lens barrel is white. I am not a physicist! Canon uses "FLUORITE" coatings on some of their zoom lenses, & that supposedly absorbs solar heat. So is it UV,IS or Fluorite?


Fluorite coatings on lenses have been around for decades. The coating is on the glass, not the lens body. The purpose is to provide a graded index of refraction interface between the glass and the air that reduces reflections (and flare). Has nothing to do with absorbing heat.

Newer lenses use newer materials for the coatings.

And as far as starting something, don't worry. Some of these threads take on a life of their own, reaching far afield from the original topic. Guess this is one of them.

I suppose people on this forum like to practice their typing skills.

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 16:55:45   #
gonate Loc: sacramento,calif
 
:D Canon made white lens because , I just lost my typing skills..

Reply
 
 
Dec 17, 2014 17:06:02   #
GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City
 
I always thought the fluorite was used as a lens element, not a coating.
This from Canon's website: Link Here

"Fluorite, which boasts a very low dispersion of light, is capable of combatting the residual aberration that standard optical glass fails to eliminate. Canon succeeded in artificially creating crystal fluorite in the 1960s, producing the first interchangeable SLR lenses with fluorite elements. In the 1970s, Canon achieved the first UD (Ultra Low Dispersion) lens elements incorporating low-dispersion optical glass. This technology was further improved to create Super UD lenses in the 1990s. A combination of fluorite, UD and Super UD elements are used in many of today's super-telephoto L series lenses, telephoto zooms and wide-angle lenses."

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 17:08:53   #
JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA
 
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I always though the fluorite was used as a lens element, not a coating.
This from Canon's website Link Here:

"A combination of fluorite, UD and Super UD elements are used in many of today's super-telephoto L series lenses, telephoto zooms and wide-angle lenses."


That is correct. Fluorite is a type of quartz that has special optical properties.

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 17:30:28   #
SharpShooter Loc: NorCal
 
mikeg1218 wrote:
OK, so I'm new to the forum but that doesn't mean I don't know the inane when I see it, nor the not relevant to the person asking a simple question.

Out side of Chernobyl or an owners stupidity does any know of someones lens failing due to any kind of radiation?

An example of stupidity, leaving ones camera for two hours, on the roof of their car, at two PM in August in Florida.

Mike, welcome to the Hog. You may be new here, but you'll fit right in!
You understand and speak inane just fine.
There are a few here that were so traumatized when the doctor slapped then on the ass, that they have not smiled since.
Mike, don't be them! :lol: :lol:
SS

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 17:52:33   #
SharpShooter Loc: NorCal
 
JimH123 wrote:
That is correct. Fluorite is a type of quartz that has special optical properties.


Jim, not that it makes much difference in this conversation but Quartz is a silica and fluorite is a calcite if my geology hasn't changed.
The crystal that Canon uses is grown specifically as optical material.
I'm sure it has other trace materials in it as calcites are pretty soft compared to Quartz(common glass). Maybe some of the smart people here can help us out!! :lol:
SS

Reply
 
 
Dec 17, 2014 18:19:25   #
mikeg1218 Loc: Port Charlotte Fl.
 
Thank you ss

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 18:43:12   #
canon Lee
 
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I always thought the fluorite was used as a lens element, not a coating.
This from Canon's website: Link Here

"Fluorite, which boasts a very low dispersion of light, is capable of combatting the residual aberration that standard optical glass fails to eliminate. Canon succeeded in artificially creating crystal fluorite in the 1960s, producing the first interchangeable SLR lenses with fluorite elements. In the 1970s, Canon achieved the first UD (Ultra Low Dispersion) lens elements incorporating low-dispersion optical glass. This technology was further improved to create Super UD lenses in the 1990s. A combination of fluorite, UD and Super UD elements are used in many of today's super-telephoto L series lenses, telephoto zooms and wide-angle lenses."
I always thought the fluorite was used as a I u ... (show quote)

Thanks for the research. It is getting much clearer. Thanks again.

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 18:51:57   #
canon Lee
 
DirtFarmer wrote:
Fluorite coatings on lenses have been around for decades. The coating is on the glass, not the lens body. The purpose is to provide a graded index of refraction interface between the glass and the air that reduces reflections (and flare). Has nothing to do with absorbing heat.

Newer lenses use newer materials for the coatings.

And as far as starting something, don't worry. Some of these threads take on a life of their own, reaching far afield from the original topic. Guess this is one of them.

I suppose people on this forum like to practice their typing skills.
Fluorite coatings on lenses have been around for d... (show quote)


Thanks for your reply. Yes it does seem that we do get off topic a lot. But I did learn something about whats inside my lens. I think maybe the white color is for guarding against heat from the sun. I do notice that when shooting outside for a long time that my lens gets hot. That cant be a good thing. When on a tripod I do cover the camera/lens with a towel and when not on a tripod, I always keep it out of the sun.. Thanks everyone. It is good to know that some here are really smart.

Reply
Dec 17, 2014 19:08:50   #
GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City
 
canon Lee wrote:
...... I think maybe the white color is for guarding against heat from the sun.

Naaah. Canon spent so much on the fluorite elements they couldn't afford black paint so left them primer white.&#127912;
(They do look cool)

Reply
Page <<first <prev 9 of 10 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.