Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,967   Posts: 1,558,439   Online: 982
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    550
    Indeed, there was too much suction this time, as I usually use multiple attachments, the last of which being a very small, flexible hose made for "micro" cleaning. This time, since the hair was caught in there, I did not use this final attachment. Normally, there is not much suction, and, for years, I have had excellent results removing particles and such in this manner.

    I gather the positive MLU test means all is well? I tried it again, and cannot notice anything amiss.

  2. #12
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by FilmOnly View Post
    Indeed, there was too much suction this time, as I usually use multiple attachments, the last of which being a very small, flexible hose made for "micro" cleaning. This time, since the hair was caught in there, I did not use this final attachment. Normally, there is not much suction, and, for years, I have had excellent results removing particles and such in this manner.

    I gather the positive MLU test means all is well? I tried it again, and cannot notice anything amiss.
    I'd make this your last cleaning spree. There's a chance you can permanently screw up your F3's metering by misaligning the mirror. It's semi-transparent and works with another smaller mirror to route light to the SPD cell deep at the bottom of the mirror box. As mentioned above, dust on the mirror is totally unimportant. Jeesh, what do you do when you spy dust deep in a lens???

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,497
    Quote Originally Posted by FilmOnly View Post
    Indeed, there was too much suction this time, as I usually use multiple attachments, the last of which being a very small, flexible hose made for "micro" cleaning. This time, since the hair was caught in there, I did not use this final attachment. Normally, there is not much suction, and, for years, I have had excellent results removing particles and such in this manner.

    I gather the positive MLU test means all is well? I tried it again, and cannot notice anything amiss.
    The MLU test means the mirror locks up. Nothing else.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    550
    I tested the camera's meter, and it is spot-on with my Sekonic hand-held.

    I certainly would not attempt to clean the mirror in the manner I have today. I have found, though, that the low suction "micro" attachment I have works great in small spaces and situations requiring very low pressure.

    I have seen dust in some lenses, and, if bad enough, I have sent a few out for cleaning. If minor, I just let it go. I do not see any reason for the "Jeesh" remark and the tone in some other replies here.
    Last edited by FilmOnly; 06-06-2012 at 04:56 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #15
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by FilmOnly View Post
    I tested the camera's meter, and it is spot-on with my Sekonic hand-held.

    I certainly would not attempt to clean the mirror in the manner I have. I have found, though, that the low suction "micro" attachment I have works great in small spaces and situations requiring very low pressure.

    I have seen dust in some lenses, and, if bad enough, I have sent a few out for cleaning. If minor, I just let it go. I do not see any reason for the "Jeesh" remark and the tone in some other replies here.
    Because your OCD approach is a recipe for disaster, especially when it's applied, in this case, to a complex camera that's no longer supported by Nikon service. But don't listen to us, OK?

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    550
    I did not say I would ignore the commentary here.

    What ever happened to civility and offering a simple, non-offensive answer to a straightforward question? The "Good Lord," "OCD," and "Jeesh" are entirely unwarranted here.

  7. #17
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by FilmOnly View Post
    I did not say I would ignore the commentary here.

    What ever happened to civility and offering a simple, non-offensive answer to a straightforward question? The "Good Lord," "OCD," and "Jeesh" are entirely unwarranted here.
    So is "I took a vacuum to my F3's mirror and guess what happened?" Just don't use Brillo next time on those stubborn spots. I rest my case.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    550
    Rest what case? The only case you have made well is the case that demonstrates your rudeness.

  9. #19
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,678
    I think your F3 is fine. The mirror can be lifted without harm. If you had used the brush attachment, I don't think it would have had a good enough seal to generate enough suction to lift the mirror.

    I have used a vacuum to pull a stubborn hair off a mirror and focusing screen. I used a bulb blower with a short length of hose attached. When releasing the bulb after squeezing, a vacuum is produced which is sufficient to remove individual hairs and dust specks from inside a camera, and the soft tubing won't harm the mirror or screen. To be extra careful, you can cut the end of the hose so it is a bit rounded instead of straight, so the entire tubing end cannot be in contact with a surface at any time.

    Cleaning mirrors is definitely a source of controversy. Specks mean nothing-they will not degrade the viewfinder image, unless they are more like a coating of dust. From shooting in desert places where the wind is almost constant, all my cameras have at times gotten a fair amount of dust on their insides. Anything painted I swab with a moistened Q-Tip or rolled-up moistened Kimwipe, rather than just blow it around. For mirrors, I hold the camera body with the lens mount down and blow with a bulb blower, angling to avoid blowing it onto the focusing screen. The F3 is easy, because the mirror can be approached through the top of the camera by removing the prism and focusing screen. Stubborn dust usually comes off with careful use of the bulb blower as described above to create a vacuum.

    For actual cleaning of a mirror, which I have done after years of use, and once after a friend's kid touched a mirror while I was showing his dad how to change lenses on pre-Ai Nikons- it's best to let a technician do it, unless you are the type who is careful enough and patient enough to do it properly.
    I have cleaned my own without any problems, but I wouldn't advise just anyone to do it.. I use a Q-tip, fairly damp with lens cleaner, to float off any hard particles. The fibers will catch and pull off stuck particles. After two passes, I follow with a lightly moistened rolled up lens tissue with the end torn off to create a soft edge.

    A couple things to remember: just as some specks on a mirror will not cause a problem, a scratch will not mean it is unusable. So a scratch from improper cleaning is not a disaster. But just as with lenses, better a layer of dust than a web of fine scratches.

    Something I've wondered about:
    I acquired a Pentax MX a while back which had a cheap crappy zoom on it with a loose aperture lever- so loose it had come out the back of the lens and was in contact with the mirror. I managed to get the lever to come out of contact with the mirror by taking the lens apart, after the failure of judicious use of Newtonian physics (i.e., tilt the camera toward the floor so the lever could be dislodged by gravity and gentle shaking fore and aft on the lens axis, followed by gentle smacks on the back when that didn't work).
    When I got the lever out and the lens off, I looked at the mirror. It did not have any scratches or marks whatsoever, even though the lever had been jammed against it and had tilted and run along the surface for a centimeter or so.
    I'm wondering if Pentax had put a hard coating, like lens coating, on the mirror. If the mirror were silvered, as opposed to aluminized, such a coating would be necessary to prevent oxidation.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    550
    lxdude: these are interesting and informative comments. I, too, have worked on a number of mirrors, mostly in terms of dusting and cleaning. In most cases, I use a similar approach to yours--a swab with some lens solution and a microfiber lens cloth. Today was the first time I have ever had even a hint of an issue, and I am glad the F3's internals seem to have held up well.

    I find it interesting that you say that the "mirror can be lifted without harm." I did see it lift today, but it did not seem to lift too much. I had thought that it would be very unlikely to see this, as the mirror is hinged solidly on a single axis, toward the top. Such is why I have felt safe using a small amount of suction with the vacuum attachment. Today, there was too much suction. In any case, I welcome any other comments you may have in regard to my reasoning concerning the single axis of the mirror.

    I have owned a number of Pentax bodies, and have found their mirrors quite durable. I do not think I have ever scratched one in dusting or cleaning. In fact, I do not think I have ever scratched any of my mirrors. My findings have led me to the same type of question you are pondering: what, exactly, is on some of these mirrors? The ones I have worked on seem much more durable than some would perhaps imagine. I agree, though, that one must always exercise caution.
    Last edited by FilmOnly; 06-06-2012 at 09:28 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin