#22. "RE: If not Lubricant…then what?" In response to In response to 20 Fri 23-Dec-11 04:36 PM by elec164
>Is there dust present? Sure. But in selling >20x30" prints, I've never had anything to worry about. >Not saying others don't have an issue. But my sample is a >very early production model. >
Sure Bill, rub salt in a guys wound why don’t ya!! Wanna trade???
Seriously though, I don’t know what your target was, but having the background for the spots being middle gray (which most dust spots will show up as) will help mask some of the less egregious spots. Just as the average detail of a scene would mask them. Its only when there is a lighter even tone area that the spots will be more apparent. If I play with your f/32 sample in an editor, I can see quite a few spots. And they appear as what I would think dust spots should look like. Irregular shaped specks randomly distributed across the whole sensor, not accumulated on a side in a more or less regular pattern and shape. And I guarantee you would not even thinking of making a 20x30 print for sale of some of the problem images from my last shoot without going through the trouble of cloning/healing out the spots. Even on the f/8 images, the spots were an eyesore. My less than 1 MP resample that’s severely compressed for posting clearly shows the spots. I even have a landscape orientation shot which shows the spots on the siding of a building.
I’m not taking anyone’s comments lightly or dismissing them out of hand. I’m putting a lot of time and research into this, and my rebuttal to some comments is not a denial of them, but just the regular discourse one would use in trying to get to the root of an issue with intelligent reasonable information. For instance Stan’s comments about pollen or spores is a valid one, except if one checks the average size of such things I would most likely encounter in my environment and regular usage, the largest is about 50 microns compared to my spots which average twice the size. His electrostatic theory sounds interesting, but then why are just a minor amount of units affected with right side collection, while the majority such as yours does not. It just does not make sense, and as the great philosopher Judge Jude says “if it doesn’t make sense, it’s usually not true”.
And that’s the rub really. I would like to say your experience and examples gives me some peace of mind. But actually it gives me more room for concern. I never said this is systemic, and the fact that it affects such a small percentage of units (got my 11/2010) might make it a real uphill battle to convince Nikon something is amiss. When I only thought it was excess lubricant from a mechanism, I was not to concern for I knew it would abate eventually. But now with Stan stating that no lube is used in the mirror mechanism and with the Drive Motor idea thrown into the mix (if that is true), my concern is that when the spots begin to abate, it may mean that the motor is now low on lube. That may and probably will result in premature failure well past warranty and wind up being an expensive repair at my cost for a fault from manufacture defect, not routine wear. Pete